The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
A lot of women want to move their hairline they don't unhappy with the size and the shape of their forehead they want a hairline lowering procedure that doesn't involve cutting with a scalpel or stitches or a prolonged recovery or risk of invasive surgery and it's very easy to do transplantation to fix a high hairline and to bring the hairline down into what da Vinci would call the golden ratio which is one-third one-third one-third
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I can't put back a full head of dense hair for you but I can make you look like you have a full head of hair you know and I go back to my dad for example total total baldness for two decades or a hairpiece and all that the transplants that he has if you look at him today even 15 years later after his procedures it looks like he has a full head of hair but it's an illusion it looks like he's got full coverage you see the frame of his face you see that da Vinci golden ratio he looks 20 years younger than when he had his procedure