# Men's Hair Loss > Non Surgical Hair Replacement >  Permanent vs Temporary (Tricopigmentation) SMP

## hairhairhair456

This thread was started because of a discussion in another thread, which i felt was taking the thread off topic.  (Link to the other thread.)




> This wasn't always the case and to be blunt, I'm not paying attention to permanent SMP companies nowadays since most are con artists and thugs.


 You're doing the same thing that I unfortunately see a lot of people do... lumping reputable companies in with bad ones, and essentially condemning the entire lot.  I'm sure you're aware that there is a tremendous amount of positive feedback concerning permanent SMP on the internet, and it's growing every day.  If "most" permanent SMP companies were con artists, then one would expect to find mountains of complaints and a few success stories... but the opposite is true.

Your message should be for people to use caution when selecting a permanent SMP clinic, not to avoid the industry altogether... at least in regards to the 'it's an industry of con-artists' critique.  

At the very least, you are impugning the reputation of many honorable technicians when you make such statements.





> The downsides of permanent SMP affect buzzcut as well as long hair scenarios respectively. The dots are made differently and if you have dots that are turning blue or spreading and causing a confluence of ink long hair will not hide the problems. If you can see scalp without the dots you'll see the problems that the dots will create in the same space.


 I've done a fair bit of research on permanent and temporary SMP, and I have yet to find a convincing argument that one is necessarily better than the other, as long as they are performed by a reputable clinic.  This includes reading through your Smpclinics website, which in my opinion, makes some extremely disingenuous (and at times outright false) arguments against permanent SMP.

The one benefit to trico that i agree with, is that it is temporary.  A temporary start to SMP is indeed the safer option.  The drawback, of course, is that if one decides that they want to keep the look long term, trico requires yearly(ish) touch up sessions.

As far as your comment about blue ink, I've read a report of a tricopigmentation patient who had trico applied to his scalp which had some scarring... he gave it a grade of F and said the ink ended up looking blue in spots, and he received a full refund... so lets acknowledge that trico also carries the risk of unsatisfactory results.  Coincidentally, he said that he wasn't very stressed over it because his long scalp hair covered it up sufficiently... which was something you said wouldn't help.

I imagine the rebuttal to that will be 'if it was permanent he would be stuck with it forever, but since he got trico it will just fade away'.  Here's the thing about that... if someone has a trico treatment and they hate the way it looks -- whether because of ink issues, technician error, or if they just dont like the style -- i highly doubt they will simply walk around with it on their head for a year (or maybe longer) until it unevenly fades away... they are most likely going to want it removed immediately by laser.  With that being the case, permanent and temporary SMP aren't nearly as far apart as they are made to seem, in regards to dealing with an unsatisfactory result.

Based on the amount of positive feedback on the internet for both temporary and permanent SMP, it seems clear that they are both viable solutions, with their own pros/cons.  Do we currently have 80 years of data on permanent SMP?  No.  But we have 5-10 at this point, and a lot of the criticisms you bring up aren't being reflected in the feedback i am seeing on the internet. 

If, as you say, it's been a while since you have followed the permanent SMP industry, perhaps you should take another look... especially with so many people looking to you for advice.

----------


## JoeTillman

> Your message should be for people to use caution when selecting a permanent SMP clinic, not to avoid the industry altogether... at least in regards to the 'it's an industry of con-artists' critique.


 I'll do no such thing. I will continue to tell people to avoid the permanent SMP industry because I know enough about it to know that it should be avoided. I do know some people in the industry that appear to be good people and try to exercise some restraint with their claims and marketing but for the most part I stand by my critique. The permanent SMP industry is, in general, corrupt with only a few exceptions. I have proof of permanent SMP clinics pretending to be clients posting reviews and I have proof of SMP clinics conducting advertising fraud with undisclosed conflicts of interest. The list of issues is quite shocking.

The permanent SMP industry's corruption is like the hair transplant industry's corruption multiplied by a factor of ten. Some of what I read and even hear coming out of the mouths of even some of the most respected practitioners blows my mind. One of my favorite claims is that one's ink won't fade for ten years and may only require minor touch ups every few years. Why? Because it has been formulated in a special way that prevents degradation. Sounds great, right? But when you ask that practitioner how long they've been performing SMP and they say two years, or even five years, or anything less than ten years, it has to be spelled out for them that they really don't know what they're talking about. If they haven't been around for ten years, of if the company they work for hasn't been around for ten years, how in the Hell can they say with a straight face that the ink won't fade for ten years? Or five, or whatever they (insert clinic name here) may claim? It's absolute lunacy.

Fair point about tricho clients that are unhappy wanting to get rid of it ASAP but my position about tricho compared to permanent is that it is the lesser of two evils. You're still tattooing your head and if you want to talk about the lasering of dots in long hair with tricho vs. permanent you're leaving out the issue of follicular damage from laser treatments. No one I know in the industry, on any level, recommends laser removal of pigment into hair bearing regions of the scalp. That is follicular suicide. 

With all of the people that have reached out to me to thank me for educating them about the differences, and the number of people that have been helped by reputable tricho practitioners after being screwed by permanent SMP procedures, I think I'll continue to trash permanent SMP when the opportunities arise. My message is one of restraint, not just education, and if one can just accept themselves the way they are without having ink or surgery, then they win. That is what matters to me. 

If you don't see the downside of permanent SMP with the company of your choice, more power to you, but don't lecture me on what I may or may not know. The only reason you've heard of tricho to begin with is because of me. I was the first person in the English speaking world to even discuss tricho and the reason why I haven't kept up with what the permanent SMP companies are doing is because I know that it is no different than it was a year ago. No magical formula has materialized that makes permanent SMP any different than it was last time I looked at it seriously. It is still the same and still something that should be avoided. 

You are more than welcome to disagree with my position but don't plan on making this a drawn out, multi-post debate, because I'm really not that interested in the issue to dedicate any more time to it.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> If you don't see the downside of permanent SMP with the company of your choice, more power to you, but don't lecture me on what I may or may not know.


 I'm not lecturing you, i'm rebutting some of your arguments.   

I've got nothing against you, and i have no financial ties to either SMP method.  I have a lot of respect for the things that you have done for the hair loss community, but i disagree with the advice you are giving on this issue.  

I like to help people that are looking into SMP, and i try to make sure that the advice i give, and that others give, is unbiased and accurate.  Perhaps i am wrong about my assessment here.  If so, then i would welcome the correction, as it would help me provide better advice to others.




> and the number of people that have been helped by reputable tricho practitioners after being screwed by permanent SMP procedures


 Just for the record, I've read numerous accounts of reputable permanent SMP clinics helping people that have been screwed by substandard SMP clinics.





> I'll do no such thing. I will continue to tell people to avoid the permanent SMP industry because I know enough about it to know that it should be avoided. 
> 
> I think I'll continue to trash permanent SMP when the opportunities arise


 There are hundreds of online testimonials of people saying permanent SMP changed their lives for the better, and the number grows every day.  It is clearly a viable solution.  With all of the snake oil that gets marketed to people struggling with hair loss, I dont get why you are so adamantly turning people off to one of the few treatments that has proven successful, and is reversible to boot.

I ask again: If the industry is rife with con artists, then why does the positive feedback dwarf the negative feedback?  What is your explanation for the multitude of success stories online?

I just read a report today of a guy who had permanent SMP done 3 years ago, hasn't had any touchups, and said 'it's the best thing i've ever done'.  Numerous times i have read of people overcoming severe depression, and even suicidal thoughts, because of permanent SMP.  How is what these people have done "irrational", and a bad decision?

From your website:




> Regardless of what is said to describe any scalp micropigmentation system, it is ultimately *the results* that should help to determine what is right for you...


 The feedback online indicates that both methods produce extremely satisfied customers, yet you only seem to acknowledge the success rate of tricopigmentation.  You basically ignore the successful results of permanent SMP, and use worst case scenarios and questionable arguments to argue against it.  I'm struggling to see how such biased information is beneficial to people that are looking for help.

You know far more about SMP then I do.  I only get my information by reading the client feedback online, and from what temporary/permanent clinics divulge.  What i find tells a different story than the one you are presenting.  Who knows... maybe there are forums out there where hundreds of people are talking about how their treatments from reputable permanent SMP clinics were a disaster, and i'm not aware of them.  If so, then perhaps you could point me in their direction.





> Fair point about tricho clients that are unhappy wanting to get rid of it ASAP but my position about tricho compared to permanent is that it is the lesser of two evils. You're still tattooing your head


 When you say 'tattooing' are you referring to both permanent and temporary SMP?  Because on your website you disparagingly refer to permanent SMP as 'a hair tattoo in sheeps clothing', further adding 'permanent SMP evolved from basic common tattoo procedures'.  Ok, so what did tricopigmentation evolve from?  Grapefruit?  I mean, it's not like we are comparing trico to ballistic missiles... we are talking about two slightly different methods of SMP.  Tattooing and permanent makeup were obviously the precursors to BOTH permanent and temporary SMP.  

It's disingenuous to imply that trico wasn't influenced by tattooing/permanent makeup (doesn't Milena herself have a background in permanent makeup?), and imply that that would somehow invalidate the effectiveness of either method.





> and if you want to talk about the lasering of dots in long hair with tricho vs. permanent you're leaving out the issue of follicular damage from laser treatments. No one I know in the industry, on any level, recommends laser removal of pigment into hair bearing regions of the scalp. That is follicular suicide.


 The damage from lasering into hair bearing regions is irrelevant, as it would affect someone who had permanent or temporary SMP the same.

The point was that if there is a problem with a trico treatment, it will more than likely be handled exactly like if there was a problem with a permanent treatment -- lasered off.  So then, of what real benefit is trico over permanent when it comes to correcting an unsatisfactory treatment?  

Temporary has a slight edge in that 'IF' (big 'if') someone was okay with walking around with an unsatisfactory treatment on their head for 1-2 years while it unevenly fades away, then they dont have to do anything.  But is that slight edge really as big of a difference as you are making it out to be?  You went on and on about the 'trauma' of having an unsatisfactory permanent treatment lasered off, but not one time said how a trico patient could remedy the same situation in the short term... it's handled the same exact way. 

If someone isn't okay with letting an unsatisfactory treatment fade away, there is essentially zero benefit in choosing trico over permanent, in regards to this issue.





> ...if you have dots that are spreading and causing a confluence of ink...


 This is another issue i have heard you reference several times both online, and on the bald truth show.

Here's a quote from your website:




> There is no danger of having the dreaded helmet head result that can be seen from changes that occur with time. Because traditional SMP methods do not disappear the required touch ups advertised as necessary every few years can lead to a confluence of pigment which eventually looks unnatural.


 What evidence are you using when you make this claim?  Can you link to some reports where the person had a touchup from a reputable clinic, and reported that the ink all merged together into a blob?  I've read many reports of people getting touchups, and cant recall this ever being an issue.  

Over time the dots get smaller and less visible as they fade, and fresh dots are applied over the top.  If anything, they will leave behind a light gray shadow as they fade away which is actually how a real shaved head of hair looks - dark dots of hair follicles over a grey base. If someone experiences severe fading, they may report this happening at an accelerated pace.  As far as a normal treatment receiving a normal touchup, i've never seen anyone report that all the dots merged together into a blob.

Additionally, and more importantly, can you explain to me how tricopigmentation avoids this 'problem'?  When trico patients go for their touchups, they dont wait for the treatment to completely fade away first, right?  So do the trico technicians apply the new dots directly on top of the old ones?  Do they put the new dots in between the old ones?  How do the trico technicians add fresh dots to a partially faded treatment without all of the ink merging together, like you say will happen when permanent SMP technicians perform similar touch ups? 

Lastly, lets not forget that one of the biggest selling points of SMP is that it is reversible by laser.  If laser can repair the terrible treatments we see from substandard clinics, then surely it will have no problem adjusting a treatment from a reputable clinic should a problem occur down the road.  This mitigates some (if not all) of your apparent speculation about what might happen in the distant future.




> Because traditional SMP methods do not disappear


 What makes you think that they dont disappear?  Not sure if i can link it here, but on the website of a certain permanent SMP clinic, a professor of biomedical engineering, who has close knowledge of the pigment they use, explains in detail how the pigment is consumed by the body over time.  Seems like a similar process to how tricopigmentation disappears, just over a longer time-frame.

As a layman, this explanation is just as detailed and technical (more, really) than any explanation i've read about how tricopigmentation disappears.  Now is this guy wrong, or not being truthful or something, or is there more to the story?  I assume he isn't, and that there isn't... but i cant say for sure.  If you have some information that contradicts his explanation, i'm all ears.

Here are a few other key arguments you make on your website:

1.  You disparage permanent companies for using a 'secret sauce' pigment, because the public doesn't know the specific ingredients.  Beauty Medical is guilty of this as well, in fact Milena herself has said online that the exact makeup of the pigment is a trade secret.

Yes, Beauty Medical's pigment was developed in Europe where the safety standards are higher... but so were the pigments of several of the most popular permanent SMP companies, no?  So if those permanent companies passed the Europe regulations, then their pigment is as safe as what Beauty Medical uses, right?  Right.  

If you have data to show that those reputable UK based clinics aren't using ink that was approved by the Europe regulations, here or at their US locations, please provide it.

2.  You say that 'the big dark secret that permanent SMP companies dont want us to know, is that there are no training standards for SMP'.  I dont even know what kind of comparison you are trying to draw here.  Training standards set by whom?  By the government?  No there are no government regulated training programs for permanent *or* temporary SMP.  Training standards set by the company itself?  Well, yes... every SMP clinic has it's own training program.  So again, not sure what you are getting at here. 

Prompted by this criticism, i decided to try and find information about trico and permanent training on the internet.  I found a detailed schedule of tricopigmentation training online, and compared it to what staff members from two reputable permanent SMP companies said about their own training.  

Trico training through Beauty Medical consists of two 4 day courses, in which the trainee performs 4 actual treatments.  After this, I'm assuming they are cleared to work on the public.  According to this document, after about a year Milena will visit the technician and watch them perform a treatment, and then 'certify' them if they perform adequately.  But still, whether or not they eventually get certified, Beauty Medical apparently sets them loose on the public after only 8 days of training and 4 actual treatments.  Is there more to it than that?  I dont know, you tell me.  Although, I have seen a trico technician from a company you are affiliated with reference the 4 day training program, which supports the accuracy of this document.  

Contrast that with what i found at two top permanent SMP companies:  One company representative said that their technicians train 'for months'.  The other company's representative said their technicians 'spent months in training, and participated in hundreds of treatments' before they were cleared to perform on their own.  

So to me, Joe Public, using what i found on the internet, which may or may not be accurate, the training at these reputable permanent SMP clinics appears to be far more rigorous than that of Beauty Medical.

Am i saying that this means that the trico technicians aren't competent, or at least the ones that eventually get certified?  Absolutely not, one only has to look at their results to confirm that.  I provide this as a rebuttal to your 'big dark secret' criticism, which implies that permanent is inferior to trico because of insufficient training.

But to go back to your advice from earlier, why not refrain from this sort of stuff and rely more on the feedback from clients?  Wouldn't that be the best indicator of the viability of a treatment?  

Ultimately I think both treatments are a benefit to the hair loss community, and should be treated as such.  When i saw someone of your stature warning people so strongly to avoid permanent SMP, it made me second guess all the advice i have given about it over the years.  After reading through your arguments, and comparing them to the feedback online, i find that your message isn't indicative of the results that reputable permanent SMP companies are turning out.

It's worth noting that i dont observe the same type of rhetoric from your colleagues on the trico side of the fence.  Nicole, in particular, has been extremely balanced in her discussions on the subject.  She puts trico first, but also acknowledges the viability of permanent, and gives it its due respect.  Her approach is a breath of fresh air in an industry that we all know could use some.    

To quote something you said on your website:




> A unified scalp micropigmentation community is a healthy community...

----------


## hairhairhair456

In regards to your exposé about the company that was secretly running a supposedly independent SMP website... yes, as someone who had sung that company's praises many times, that was extremely dissapointing to learn.  It was unnecessary, unseemly behavior, and you're commended for bringing it to light. 

That being said, it doesn't change the fact that that company delivers a quality product, which consistently changes peoples lives for the better.  Similarily, they have a proven track record of going above and beyond to work with clients when problems arise.  It was a terrible business decision by whoever ran the website, but their product, the skill of the technicians they employ, and how they treat their clients, are still top shelf.

Again, this is based on what i observe from the online feedback.  If there are websites out there where hundreds of clients are reporting disaster results with this company (or others), feel free to inform me of their whereabouts.

----------


## JoeTillman

Your post is rife with contradictions, falsehoods and flat out uninformed opinions. I didn't read the entirety of your post simply because I don't have that kind of time on my hands but one thing that stood out was how you said you try to help people with their SMP research yet you said I know more than you but you have no problem trying to debate me. Right. That makes sense.

I'm pretty sure I know who you are so to say you have no financial ties to the industry is a flat out lie. Regardless, I don't really care. Good day.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> Your post is rife with contradictions, falsehoods and flat out uninformed opinions.


 Rife with contradictions and falsehoods, yet you didn't cite a single instance.  Okay.

I used research and facts to make my points above, and i can source them to anyone who asks.  If i'm as uninformed as you are claiming, then you should have no problem defending your position.




> you said I know more than you but you have no problem trying to debate me. Right. That makes sense.


 You left out the last part where i explained that the claims you are making are not reflected in the feedback i find online.  Hence my request for you to go into more detail, or provide sources.

Additionally, people dont have to be equally knowledgeable about a topic to debate it.





> I'm pretty sure I know who you are so to say you have no financial ties to the industry is a flat out lie. Regardless, I don't really care. Good day.


 If you think i have ties to the industry, then it confirms to me you have no idea who i am.

It's really irrelevant who i am, though, because the points i raised are either valid or they aren't.  If they aren't, then you should have no problem rebutting them.

Saying you dont have time, or dont care, to discuss this is a cop-out.  This is a very serious issue to many people, and your words carry a lot of weight.  You had no problem taking the time to make webpages with such bold claims, im just asking you to back them up.

I'll say again that i have nothing against you, and there is no hostility here on my part.  Im much more on your side of things than it might appear to you at the moment, i just happen to disagree with you on this topic.  My only goal is to ensure that the advice provided to people dealing with hair loss is accurate.  If i'm wrong in my assessment then i have no problem admitting it, but you will have to do better than simply saying im wrong.

----------


## JoeTillman

There is no "cop-out" if I believe I have better things to do but since you believe my words carry a lot of weight then let me words stand; avoid SMP in general but if you do get SMP, get trichopigmentation. 

Like I said in my post that you decided to respond to after nearly two months of silence, I have no interest in making this a multi-post debate. Quote me, question me, challenge me; I don't care because I have my own opinions based on my nearly fifteen years of experience. I've seen multiple cases of ink confluence (including the owners of two of the biggest SMP companies) and I've seen multiple cases of follicular destruction from too much laser removal and in my extremely experienced opinion trichopigmentation is better. There are permanent SMP clinics that are better than others but my opinion stands. I've seen MANY cases where the client says he's happy but the vast majority of these clients don't exactly have the best idea of what natural is supposed to look like (which is another issue altogether), but who am I to challenge them individually on their personal satisfaction? Regardless, thank you for your opinions, Mr. Anonymous, but I'm going to stick with mine which are not up for debate.

----------


## Delphi

It's a head tattoo. How is this even a debate in 2016? It is so obvious that hairhairhair456 works for one of the permanent tattoo places, but even so, anyone who thinks that tattooing your scalp permanently with dots is a smart idea should really try to see people who are five years out from their first permanent head tattoo. I'm sure that would change their minds. Some of the pictures online are horrendous. I also find it hard to respect any hair transplant doctors  who would offer this as an option in their clinics. It's  not a medically sound option, it's just a money grab.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> It's a head tattoo. How is this even a debate in 2016? It is so obvious that hairhairhair456 works for one of the permanent tattoo places, but even so, anyone who thinks that tattooing your scalp permanently with dots is a smart idea should really try to see people who are five years out from their first permanent head tattoo. I'm sure that would change their minds. Some of the pictures online are horrendous. I also find it hard to respect any hair transplant doctors  who would offer this as an option in their clinics. It's  not a medically sound option, it's just a money grab.


 Delphi, you are wrong on both counts.  I dont work for an SMP company, and SMP has long ago been proven a viable treatment.  

This thread is not about the viability of SMP, though, so if you want to discuss that, feel free to start another thread.  I would be happy to provide reports from people that have had SMP for 5 years, but i'm not going to get into that here.

----------


## Delphi

> Delphi, you are wrong on both counts.  I dont work for an SMP company, and SMP has long ago been proven a viable treatment.  
> 
> This thread is not about the viability of SMP, though, so if you want to discuss that, feel free to start another thread.  I would be happy to provide reports from people that have had SMP for 5 years, but i'm not going to get into that here.


 How can it be considered a proven treatment for hair loss? How does it actually treat hair loss? It's a head tattoo!  With all due respect, this is a discussion forum, and while you may not want this thread to be about the viability of SMP, it is. I am 100% of the opinion that you work in the head tattoo industry, there is no other reason for you to be so defensive or to try to take Joe Tillman to task if you had no skin in the game.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> How can it be considered a proven treatment for hair loss? How does it actually treat hair loss? It's a head tattoo!  With all due respect, this is a discussion forum, and while you may not want this thread to be about the viability of SMP, it is. I am 100% of the opinion that you work in the head tattoo industry, there is no other reason for you to be so defensive or to try to take Joe Tillman to task if you had no skin in the game.


 Delphi, you are 100% wrong.  Someone doesn't have to be tied to an industry to criticize another persons claims about an industry, especially if they feel they aren't accurate.  I dont know anything about you, but i'm assuming that you are a proponent of hair transplant surgery.  If you saw someone trashing hair surgery and making misleading/questionable claims about it, might you feel compelled to speak up, even if you dont work in the industry?  That's all i am doing here.   

But how about this, if it makes you feel better, you can assume i am the CEO of a permanent SMP clinic.  It's essentially irrelevant who i am, because the criticisms i have raised are either valid, or they aren't.

I would be more than happy to discuss the viability of SMP with you, but not in this thread.  This thread is about Joe's portrayal of the permanent side of the industry.

If you look at the forum rules, you will find these two entries:




>  Stay on topic
>  No highjacking of other users threads


 This is the second time i have politely asked you to not take this thread off topic.  Please do not make another post about the viability of SMP.  Start a new topic, if you want to discuss it.

----------


## Delphi

> Delphi, you are 100% wrong.  Someone doesn't have to be tied to an industry to criticize another persons claims about an industry, especially if they feel they aren't accurate.  I dont know anything about you, but i'm assuming that you are a proponent of hair transplant surgery.  If you saw someone trashing hair surgery and making misleading/questionable claims about it, might you feel compelled to speak up, even if you dont work in the industry?  That's all i am doing here.   
> 
> But how about this, if it makes you feel better, you can assume i am the CEO of a permanent SMP clinic.  It's essentially irrelevant who i am, because the criticisms i have raised are either valid, or they aren't.
> 
> I would be more than happy to discuss the viability of SMP with you, but not in this thread.  This thread is about Joe's portrayal of the permanent side of the industry.
> 
> If you look at the forum rules, you will find these two entries:
> 
> 
> ...


 Im actually a proponent of the medical management of hair loss since this is what Ive have done for myself, but I do think hair transplants have their place. I have not taken this thread off topic or highjacked  it , I have actually stayed on topic so please to not tell me how to conduct myself on a forum I have been a member of of for 7 years.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> Im actually a proponent of the medical management of hair loss since this is what Ive have done for myself, but I do think hair transplants have their place. I have not taken this thread off topic or highjacked  it , I have actually stayed on topic so please to not tell me how to conduct myself on a forum I have been a member of of for 7 years.


 Perhaps i misinterpreted what you were saying.  When you said "it's a head tattoo", i thought you were criticizing both temporary and permanent SMP, since they are both technically tattoos.  Re-reading it, it seems you might have only been directing your criticism towards permanent specifically.  If so, apologies.

In regards to that, it's pretty much established now that permanent SMP, from a reputable company, is a viable treatment for hairloss.  There are mountains of feedback online that confirm this.  When i say 'treatment', it's meant in the same way as concealer or hair systems are referred to as 'treatments'.  Perhaps 'solution' is a better term, but the point is that it has been proven to improve the lives of people suffering from hair loss.

This notion that permanent SMP from a reputable clinic will merge together, or degrade in some horrible manner, in four to five years is nothing more than a myth.  This isn't 2009 anymore, where we have no meaningfull feedback to look at... there are hundreds of reports of people who have had treatments for multiple years, and multiple touchups, who dont report these issues.  Even 5+ years.  Keep in mind that what Joe says about treatments degrading over time is anecdotal, at least as far as i have seen.  His trico colleagues experienced in SMP aren't making such broad claims about permanent (again, as far as i have seen), and more importantly, it is essentially nowhere to be found when you research the feedback online.  

I take recommending (as well as dismissing) either type of SMP very seriously, and i have actively tried to find proof/confirmation, of the issues/differences Joe speaks of.  If i had found evidence to back up his assertions, i would have been right there with him warning people to avoid it.  But not only have i not found support for what he claims, i've often found the exact opposite.  I'll speak more about that later. 

I understand your position, though, as you might not be very involved in the SMP industry.  The same thing is seen on SMP forums, where people who had terrible hair transplants 10 or 15 years ago, or who might have googled 'bad hair transplants', will come online and proclaim that all hair transplant surgeries are recipes for disaster, and that they are in no way a viable option.  The truth is that the hair transplant industry has made significant advances over the years, and it produces satisfied clients regularly... you just have to know where to look.

So if you aren't very involved in the SMP community, you might have seen some abomonations from substandrd clinics, and think that permanent is nothing more than a snake oil money grab.  You might have even seen a bad treatment from a good company now and then, because as im sure you are aware, even the best surgeons/clinics dont have 100% success rates.  But if you spend even a little time researching feedback from reputable clinics, it is quickly apparent that it is a viable option.  The positive feedback far outweighs any of the negatives, you just have to know where to look.

----------


## Delphi

> Perhaps i misinterpreted what you were saying.  When you said "it's a head tattoo", i thought you were criticizing both temporary and permanent SMP, since they are both technically tattoos.  Re-reading it, it seems you might have only been directing your criticism towards permanent specifically.  If so, apologies.
> 
> In regards to that, it's pretty much established now that permanent SMP, from a reputable company, is a viable treatment for hairloss.  There are mountains of feedback online that confirm this.  When i say 'treatment', it's meant in the same way as concealer or hair systems are referred to as 'treatments'.  Perhaps 'solution' is a better term, but the point is that it has been proven to improve the lives of people suffering from hair loss.
> 
> This notion that permanent SMP from a reputable clinic will merge together, or degrade in some horrible manner, in four to five years is nothing more than a myth.  This isn't 2009 anymore, where we have no meaningfull feedback to look at... there are hundreds of reports of people who have had treatments for multiple years, and multiple touchups, who dont report these issues.  Even 5+ years.  Keep in mind that what Joe says about treatments degrading over time is anecdotal, at least as far as i have seen.  His trico colleagues experienced in SMP aren't making such broad claims about permanent (again, as far as i have seen), and more importantly, it is essentially nowhere to be found when you research the feedback online.  
> 
> I take recommending (as well as dismissing) either type of SMP very seriously, and i have actively tried to find proof/confirmation, of the issues/differences Joe speaks of.  If i had found evidence to back up his assertions, i would have been right there with him warning people to avoid it.  But not only have i not found support for what he claims, i've often found the exact opposite.  I'll speak more about that later. 
> 
> I understand your position, though, as you might not be very involved in the SMP industry.  The same thing is seen on SMP forums, where people who had terrible hair transplants 10 or 15 years ago, or who might have googled 'bad hair transplants', will come online and proclaim that all hair transplant surgeries are recipes for disaster, and that they are in no way a viable option.  The truth is that the hair transplant industry has made significant advances over the years, and it produces satisfied clients regularly... you just have to know where to look.
> ...


 It's so transparent that you have skin in the game. Sell all the hair tattoos you want, I'm not buying any and I don't think too many well educated hair loss sufferers on the forums are either. Good luck!

----------


## hairhairhair456

> It's so transparent that you have skin in the game.


 You dont have to be a shill to be passionate about something, especially sensitive cosmetic procedures such as this.

But hey, you already caught me.  I told you I'm the CEO of a permanant SMP company.  Hoo boy, sure was wrong to think i could fool someone as sharp as you, huh?  Well good job on that, Barney Fife.

Now that that you've fulfilled your duties here, you can move on to guessing peoples professions in other threads.  Leave us to discuss the validity of my criticisims -- the point of the thread -- which as i have stated several times, are completely independent of whether or not i work in the industry.  They are either valid or they aren't.

What's really funny about this is how it only seems to be a problem to you if _I_ work in the industry.  How about Joe?  He set up a website to promote the cosmetic company he is tied to, where he trashes his competition using what i feel is inaccurate information, and he literally advertises the website as 'biased and proud of it'.  That's no problem eh?  And when pressed about this, he says 'nah im not even gonna read what you wrote, because i dont care'.    

But if someone asks him to source/explain the bold claims he is making, then they are obviously a shill, whether they admit it or not, and up to no good for asking such questions.  Alright man, whatever.






> Sell all the hair tattoos you want, I'm not buying any and I don't think too many well educated hair loss sufferers on the forums are either. Good luck!


 Well that's obviously not true.  Heck, i bet even Joe would tell you that's not true.  But it's pretty clear that, contrary to what you stated earlier, you aren't interested in having a two way discussion about this, so it was nice chatting with you!

----------


## Delphi

It must be gratifying to be so passionate about something as important to the world has head tattoos, especially since you have no skin in the game. Good luck in your quest to spread the word on the virtues of this groundbreaking hair loss treatment. :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):

----------


## hairhairhair456

> Your post is rife with contradictions, falsehoods and flat out uninformed opinions.


 Still waiting for you to point out the contradictions and falsehoods that were 'rife' in my post, Joe.  If you cant back up that claim, about a single post, then it's no wonder why this is going the way it is.  Are there really contradictions and falsehoods 'rife' throughout it, or did you just make that up to try and discredit what i was saying?

Hey remember that one time that guy claimed you had insulted him, and you responded by telling him to quote where you did.  And then he didn't, and you responded with 'still waiting for you to quote where i insulted you'?  Good times.  




> avoid SMP in general


 I find this really odd... you make an entire website to promote the SMP company you are affiliated with, yet in other places you say it should generally be avoided, and that it's best if people can just accept themselves the way they are without ink or surgery.

I mean it might make sense if on your website you had made a blog post discussing acceptance and avoidance, or perhaps devoted even a _single_ sentence to any of the drawbacks of tricopigmentation, but that stuff is nowhere to be found.  The entire website is one big glowing advertisement for tricopigmentation.

If i felt that it's best for people dealing with hair loss to accept themselves without ink or surgery, and that they should generally avoid SMP, then i certainly wouldn't create a website where i sing the praises of SMP, list zero drawbacks, and encourage people to use my company.  It's like saying that you think people should generally avoid hot dogs, and then going outside and setting up a hot dog stand with a big sign that says "come try our hot dogs!  they're the best you've ever tasted!".

If this is how you 'really' feel, then why did you not make one single mention of this sentiment on your website, a website meant to advise potentially vulnerable people who are thinking about SMP?






> I've seen multiple cases of ink confluence (including the owners of two of the biggest SMP companies).


 First of all, please answer my question about this issue with trico.  When someone gets a trico touchup, the technicians apply pigment to a partially faded treatment.  Do they put the dots on top of one another?  Do they put them between the old dots?  How do trico technicians add new dots to a partially faded treatment without the ink merging together, like you say will happen when permanent companies perform similar touchups?  

So your source for this oft repeated claim is that you saw some guys where it was an issue.  Thousands of people have been treated by reputable clinics at this point, and hundreds of them have left detailed feedback about their treatments... ive never seen it reported, and you cant provide any examples.  You also wont say which companies performed the treatments you are referencing, which is pretty convienient... leaving it ambiguous casts a cloud over the entire industry, especially when you throw in the '2 biggest companies' part.  

If someone was making similar claims about trico, would 'i saw some people that it happened to, but im not going to say where they had their treatments, nor will i provide any examples or further clarification' be substantive enough for you for the claim to stand?  I highly doubt it.  I am asking you again to provide some evidence to back up this claim, other than your anecdotal, ambiguous report... in addition to explaining how trico avoids this dilemma.




> thank you for your opinions, Mr. Anonymous, but I'm going to stick with mine which are not up for debate.


 This isn't all about 'opinions'.  A major point of your website is where you claim permanent is inferior to temporary because of training, yet i have evidence to show that the company you are promoting requires only 8 days of training and 4 treatments before they are cleared to work on the public, versus two permanent companies who say they spend months in training and participate in hundreds of treatments before cleared for solo work.

Care to comment on that?  

Or how about your line about permanent being inferior because it evolved from permanent makeup/tatoo, but not temporary... even though temporary is a tattoo and the founder of trico has a background in permanent makeup?   

How are claims like this not the same type of disingenuous information that you supposedly created this website to protect people against?

As far as opinions go, this line is pretty good:




> I believe that, for the most part, having this option to permanent SMP clinics simply draws the kind of person that wants to do good.


 Trico draws people that want to do good, implying that permanent draws people that want to do harm?  Come on.  You're aware that this good/evil stuff is the same type of rhetoric your friend TC uses to trash SMP across the internet, right?

And speaking of that guy:




> I've seen MANY cases where the client says he's happy but the vast majority of these clients don't exactly have the best idea of what natural is supposed to look like (which is another issue altogether), but who am I to challenge them individually on their personal satisfaction?


 Is this your rebuttal to me asking you to explain why there is so much positive feedback for permanent SMP online, as well as why the positive feedback far outweighs the negative?  Your explanation is that they think they look good, but they really look bad, and either no one is telling them, or everyone around them also cant distinguish between a good and bad result either?  Well this is literally the same rebuttal TC gives to explain all the positive feedback about SMP online.  It's weak when he does it, and it's especially weak when you do it.  

And even if you want to stick to the theory that all these thousands of people cant properly gauge how they look, you would be hard pressed to find a client from a reputable SMP clinic that got SMP without seeing it on someone else in person first.  Many of the technicians have SMP, and most of the people that do consultations have SMP as well... also there are all the former clients that offer to meet up with prospective clients, which happens often.  If it looks as bad as you claim it does, then why do so many people go forward with permanent SMP after they see it in person?  In many cases seeing it in person is specifically what gives them the confidence to proceed with the treatment.  What's your explanation for this?  Everyone is just wrong?

It's also funny how TC supports his argument against reputable SMP by posting only pictures of horribly botched SMP treatments, and in the only photograph of permanent SMP on your website, you use one of the _exact same photos_ he does, to support your argument as well.  You guys share 'pictures for trashing permanent SMP' folders or something?

And by the way, in regards to the 'some permanent hairlines are too straight and dont look natural' criticism... here are a few photos off your website from one of the companies you endorse.  Link  Dont get me wrong, it looks fine, and im sure the guys are happy, but would you not consider these hairlines about as straight and defined as it gets?

What i find most interesting here is how this discussion compares to the discussion you blogged about having with 'Tyler' (in quotes because he was probably a fictional character).  I first became aware of your website when you blogged about the financial goings on of a popular SMP company.  Those blog entries have since been removed - and i could make a pretty good guess as to why - but i have copies of them.  On the page about exposing 'Tyler', you chronicle the timeline of how it all went down.  Here's a brief summary:  

Tyler was comparing a trico clinic to a permanent, and he said both offer high quality results, but that he preferred permanent because he felt it was safer.  You said that you had never heard that, and asked him what he was basing it on.  He provided a substantive answer.  (You can argue how accurate it was, but the point here is that he provided an actual answer.)  You followed up and asked him for more clarification, and he provided another answer with even more substance.  After this, you were banned from asking any more questions.  At this point you felt his explanations were disengenious, and that he was "deflecting the question by introducing more doubt, rather than providing facts explaining his statement as I had requested".  This prompted you to start investigating who owned the website, uncover the charade, and basically create an entire website to rebut their website.

So how is what i am doing any different than what you did there?  Lets compare our actions:

You came across a website where someone said both tricopigmentation and permanent were quality treatments, but that he preferred permanent.  You took issue with the reason he preferred one over the other, stating that it went against most everything you knew about trico, and asked him to explain his reasoning further.

I came across a website where someone completely trashed the entire permanent industry in favor of tricopigmentation.  I took issue with several of the reasons the author used to trash permanent, stating that they went against most everything i knew about permanent, and asked him to explain his reasoning further.

So you and me are doing the exact same thing so far, right?  Great.  Two guys trying to make sure that the information about SMP online is fair and accurate.

Now lets compare the responses:

"Tyler" responded to your first inquiry with additional clarification about his statement.  You asked for more, and he responded with even further clarification about his statement.

You responded to my first inquiry by telling me my post was full of falsehoods and contradictions (without mentioning them), saying that you didnt read what i wrote, and accused me of working in the industry -- with _zero_ clarification on anything i had requested.  I repeated my request for you to provide evidence/clarification for the claims you are making.  You responded by repeating yourself, and telling me your opinions aren't up for debate -- with _zero_ clarification on anything i had requested.  

If "Tyler" had responded to your inquiry by simply repeating his opinions, saying it wasn't up for debate, and saying he wasn't going to read what you wrote because he didn't care, would that have went over well with you?  Of course not.  I mean he actually made multiple attempts to explain his reasoning, and you still went on a crusade after him.  

So explain to me why you feel that you are immune from the EXACT SAME scrutiny that you impose on others?  Remember that "Tyler" wasn't even trashing trico -- he praised it -- but merely said he preferred permanent.  In your case you are _completely trashing_ the entire permanent industry.  Shouldn't your advice be able to stand up to even more scrutiny than Tyler's?  Then defend it properly.

----------


## hairhairhair456

Cat got your tounge, Joe?  You never seem to be short of words when you are holding someone else accountable for the claims they make, so why so mum now?  

Consider this discussion from last year, where a guy merely said that one website ranked higher than another, and you proceeded to make multiple lengthy posts about it, emailed him graphs of web page rankings, and posted multiple graphs on the forum.  Eventually, you said this to him:




> ...how does this translate to the advice you give *people that are making serious decisions about their lives*?  
> 
> I'm not going to let you get away with your BS and it is exactly my new position in this world that allows me to continue to hammer your lies, hypocrisy and vicious attacks on others without any worry of repercussions for my employer, since I now have none. I'm making it a point to quote everything you say and screenshot everything you say because you have a tendency to edit your postings a couple hours later. No more. Consider this a notice. I'm going to be on you like white on rice in a snowstorm and I'm going to call you on your BS every time you spew it. Here and everywhere else you post. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.


 So you said that you are going to follow this guy around the internet and call him out 'EVERY SINGLE TIME' that he spreads lies, hypocrisy, and attacks (and rightfully so), yet when presented with specific critiques of the claims you have made on your own website (where you advise *people that are making serious decisions about their life*), all of a sudden you cant be bothered to respond, because you 'really aren't that interested in the issue'.  

Seriously?  You put all that effort into proving someone wrong who said one website ranks higher than another, but wont put any effort into rebutting the specific and sourced critiques i have made about the claims you make on your website?  Come on.

Another tidbit from that thread, was that early in the thread, that same person had made a comment implying you worked for a forum, and you responded with:




> for some reason you insinuated that I work for a forum. I think. What the Hell was that about anyway? Care to prove this or are you going to make a veiled accusation and then slink away by not following up on it?


 and:




> Please expound on this "you don't work for a forum......right" comment. I know this was sarcasm which means that you are saying I work for a forum. Which one? Or instead, admit you were trying to stir the pot and that you have no proof to base this off of.


 This is similar to what i posted earlier where a guy claimed you insulted him in a post you made, and you made multiple posts asking for him to quote where you did.

So how does this work?  Proof is required to accuse you of secretly working for a forum, or to claim you insulted someone, but if _you_ want to accuse someone (me) of being financially tied to the industry, and claim that a post i made is full of falsehoods and contradictions, you dont have to follow up on the accusation or quote the falsehoods and contradictions?   

So, Joe, can you point out the falsehoods and contradictions rife in my post, or say why you think i am financially tied to the industry?  Or, as you put it, would you rather admit you were trying to stir the pot, and that you have no proof to base those accusations off of?  Pot, kettle.





A little over a year ago, someone was criticizing your website on another forum (although they didn't list specifics, and were being very immature), and you told them:




> Regardless, if you find something wrong with my website, list them out and email or private message me. I'll see if your claims are legitimate and I'll make changes based on these truths. If you are all for the truth then you shouldn't have an issue with this and you should be happy to help.


 So, was that like a one time offer to the public or something?  

Why did you encourage the guy that was ranting like a third grader to list out his claims so you could look into them, but when i took the time to list out, explain, and source my concerns, you refuse to even read them?    




> "If you are all for the truth..."


 Well, i dont know about the guy you said that to, but i am.  Are you?  

And if Joe cant be bothered to defend his claims, I encourage anyone else in the tricopigmentation industry to rebut the observations i have made.  

In a strange twist of fate, on another forum someone was disparaging the results and reputation of a tricopigmentation clinic owner.  I spoke up strongly in support of not only the results from that clinic, but also for the character of the owner.  Later I found out that Joe had sold his website to that very same person, so hopefully that makes it more clear that im not just a disgruntled competitor trying to trash tricopigmentation or something.

Ive said many times that i think Joe is a good guy, and there is no question that he helps many many people with advice about hair transplants.  That doesn't give him a pass to play fast and loose with advice on SMP, though... at least from me.  Someone help me understand how the things Joe has said aren't the same type of misleading, disingenuous, bogus rhetoric that we all claim to be so opposed to.

One last note, i started this discussion to give Joe a chance to defend the criticisms i have made.  If he wont, or cant, then i will assume my obserations are valid.  If so, i intend to spread this information across every hairloss forum i can find, and warn people that Joe Tillman and Ahead Ink are engaging in unscrupulous advertising.

----------


## Delphi

Oh boy, this guy doesnt quit. After two months hairhairhair456, a screen name that screams shill, BTW, is still trying to bait Joe Tillman. Yeah, this guy has no skin in the game, right  :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic):   The head tattoo people are really something. Please, take this garbage somewhere else, people are not interested in buying what you are selling. Who has time to bump a dead thread after two months and  write a post like this unless they are very motivated and have some underlying ulterior motive? Ridiculous and so transparent.

----------


## mic28

He seems to be posting this garbage in a number of other forums under the same name. Never seen him talking about anything other than permanent SMP in any of his posts!

----------


## hairhairhair456

> He seems to be posting this garbage in a number of other forums under the same name. Never seen him talking about anything other than permanent SMP in any of his posts!


 Well that's obviously not true.  I haven't posted any of what i have written here anywhere else.  Also, i only have 7 posts on another forum, and you can clearly see me discussing and praising temporary SMP in them.

There were a few more posts on that forum where i stood up for the work, and reputation, of the owner of Ahead Ink, but they were deleted when a mod cleaned up the thread.

Oh and also in that thread, you would have seen me specifically standing up for Joe against someone who was directing gay slurs and over the top rudeness in his direction.  That person was banned, and it was probably prompted by my input.

So... yeah.  

It was funny because the guy that got banned accused me of being a tricopigmentation shill, and said that i was really the owner of Ahead Ink posting under another name, because i was standing up for he and Joe, and their work.

Then i come over here and get called a shill for permanent, because i am asking Joe to explain some of his statements he made on a site owned by the owner of Ahead Ink.

Some days a guy just cant win, eh?






> Oh boy, this guy doesnt quit. After two months hairhairhair456, a screen name that screams shill, BTW, is still trying to bait Joe Tillman. Yeah, this guy has no skin in the game, right   The head tattoo people are really something. Please, take this garbage somewhere else, people are not interested in buying what you are selling. Who has time to bump a dead thread after two months and  write a post like this unless they are very motivated and have some underlying ulterior motive? Ridiculous and so transparent.


 Blah blah blah.  You're clueless guy.  Since you are repeating yourself, let me go ahead and repeat my previous response to you:




> What's really funny about this is how it only seems to be a problem to you if I work in the industry. How about Joe? He set up a website to promote the cosmetic company he is tied to, where he trashes his competition using what i feel is inaccurate information, and he literally advertises the website as 'biased and proud of it'. That's no problem eh? And when pressed about this, he says 'nah im not even gonna read what you wrote, because i dont care'.
> 
> But if someone asks him to source/explain the bold claims he is making, then they are obviously a shill, whether they admit it or not, and up to no good for asking such questions. Alright man, whatever.


 I love how you guys cant rebut any of the criticisms i have made, and can only engage in ad-hominem attacks, and speculation about my identity.  More proof that i am on the right track here.

Here's an idea, how about unless you want to discuss the specific issues i have raised, you dont click on the thread.  How about that?  You can cry shill till you are blue in the face, but that isn't going to magically make any of my criticisms invalid.

Dont worry, this isn't going to go on forever.  If you had bothered to read this thread, you would see that the evidence to support my claim that Joe/Ahead Ink are engaging in unscrupulous advertising, is rather damning.  Perhaps that is why Joe stopped reading it (or at least 'supposedly' stopped reading).  If Joe and Ahead Ink wont, or can't, rebut the observations i have raised, then so be it.  But I'm giving them a chance.  And if they dont, i will spread the word... just like Joe did when he encountered a similar situation.  We all have to keep each other honest, right?

You should ask Joe why he told that one guy to send him his concerns over the website, and that he would be happy to look into them, but refused (supposedly) to even read mine.  My guess is it's because Joe knew the other guy was a blubbering mess who wouldn't be able to make a coherent argument, but could quickly tell that i was on point.  Hence the fingers in the ears 'i cant hear you' excuse.

I haven't even pulled out my Ace in the hole yet.

----------


## Delphi

Im sure everyone in the hair loss community is waiting with bated breath for your ace in the hole. Joe Tillman has proven himself to be a real expert to all of us, so I doubt youll be able to change the fact that he has helped countless people and continues to give newbies lifesaving advice. I personally think all head tattoos are ridiculous.  You have skin in the game and some kind of bone to pick, its blatantly obvious, but no one really cares. How about this, why dont you add your real name your picture and the tattoo company you work for to your next post instead of being a forum troll hiding behind your keyboard?  Instead of picking fights and making threats, dont you think you can market your tattoos in a more productive and honest way?

----------


## hairhairhair456

> Joe Tillman has proven himself to be a real expert to all of us, so I doubt youll be able to change the fact that he has helped countless people and continues to give newbies lifesaving advice.


 Are you even reading this thread?  I've literally said this same thing several times now. 

What you are saying doesn't even make sense.  This isn't about 'changing the fact that he has helped people', it's about holding him accountable for the way he is marketing his version of SMP.  You know.  The SAME EXACT THING Joe has done to others in the past.




> I personally think all head tattoos are ridiculous.


 That's nice.  Maybe you should stay out of discussions concerning SMP then.




> but no one really cares.


 Oh it's pretty clear how much you care.  

I've humored your incessant vitriol for far too long.  Stop wasting everyones time by repeating the same attacks over and over again against me.   There are rules against doing such things, and they are there to prevent all this meaningless nonsense you have added to the thread.

Stop making posts just to call me a shill.  Speak to the topic of this thread, which is the specific criticisms i have laid out, or move along.

With all of the accusatory posts you have made in this thread, the fact that you have been unable to refute one single issue that i raised, says volumes about the accuracy of my argument.

----------


## JoeTillman

If anything, I find it flattering that someone is so concerned about my opinion that they feel inclined to spend so much time to debate me multiple times when I'm not even responding. 

I'll take the bait...

The difference between what I was doing with regards to Tyler Greene and what you're doing with me is simple. Tyler Greene was a fictitious character created by the former web "guru" for HIS. He was charging member clinics, and yes some tricho clinics, a membership fee without disclosing that the website was owned by HIS. In essence, trico clinics were paying HIS for marketing and whenever a trico clinic was being reviewed or compared to a non-trico (permanent) clinic the review was always slighted away from trico without being obviously anti-trico. The bias was very clear but not disclosed.

I am me, someone whose real face and identity are exposed to the world on a daily basis. I am not using an alias and I'm making it crystal clear how I feel about permanent SMP vs. trico. My bias is clear. I also refused to take advertising dollars from any permanent SMP clinic, and a few had asked. I'm not misrepresenting what I do to my clients and I'm not misleading my readers and viewers. I'm also completely uninvolved financially from the trico community, and the SMP community overall. I accept no advertising revenue from, nor do I work with any trico exclusive clinics. I eventually became a target by some of the players on the permanent side of the industry and I found it to be a greasy environment in which I no longer wish to associate. I know some permanent SMP people that seem to be good people and present a quality product, which I've said before, but in general I think the permanent side is sleazy. My old website will eventually be changed with new content and maybe a new direction. I don't know, but it isn't my place to dictate as such. 

My gut tells me you are associated with the industry. All 18 of your posts (currently) on this forum have to do with SMP and I've seen you on other forums as well with the same pattern. You've also made statements that only one in the industry would make and you've even revealed some information that I've only told to four people, one of which knows you personally. Can I prove this? Probably not, at least not to others publicly, but when I say that I could not care less, I really mean it. 

In the end however, it doesn't really matter if you are in the industry. If anything, it  says something if you have to hide behind an anonymous username instead of being front and center like me. I've come to expect this from the permanent SMP folks. I suspect the reason why you keep coming back is because my old website is still dominating Google search in most English speaking markets and your clients are asking you about it. I only realized this while writing this post because it made me think to check the rankings of the site. The funny thing is that I've not even touched my old website in nearly six months! Not bad for someone without a lot of SMP experience, eh?

So I'll close with this although I expect more rebuttals about nothing to ensue. I really cannot care less about the SMP industry. My opinions are my opinions and I've seen what I've seen, which is how my opinions have been formed. If people are happy with permanent SMP, God bless them. If you've seen horrible trico results, more power to you. You don't have to agree and you can prove me wrong all you wish. I don't care. Yes, you can say that you aren't anti-trico and you think I'm a good guy and you can even say that I'm deflecting from "the issues" but, again, I don't care. 

Good day.

----------


## hairhairhair456

> You've also made statements that only one in the industry would make and you've even revealed some information that I've only told to four people, one of which knows you personally.


 Quote it Joe.  Quote the information that you have only told to four people.  Quote it, and i will *PROVE* that this is a lie, and that you have no idea who i am.

You wont do it though, because you know that if you did, people would realize that you are bluffing.  Casting doubt about your opponents financial ties is a very effective way to discredit someone without having to defend your position.

You and i know that it's a bluff, though.  

So folks, you know how i know im right?  It's because Joe has refused to address any of the issues i raised, and instead, tries to bully me into revealing my identity, as well as makes baseless accusations about my involvement in the industry.  These are tactics people use when their positions are indefensible, just like Joe points out when people do it to him.

By the way, saying 'go ahead and accuse me of deflecting the issues, i dont care' doesn't absolve you from being the type of person who deflects the issues.

Here's one final example of Joe chastising someone for the exact same things he is doing to me in this thread:




> This is a deflection. I'm not concerned with who listens to me on this. I'm speaking to you.
> 
> You've had two chances to back this statement up yet instead you deflect. Therefore, as I already know, you are lying. I've busted you about lying online before and this is no different. You lie to disparage techniques or ideas you disagree with and when confronted to justify your statements you make excuses. You are a liar.
> 
> More deflection, this time by associating me with an effeminate beverage.
> 
> Deflection from the issue. Nothing more.


 Those quotes were all from the same thread, by the way.




> I'm not misrepresenting what I do to my clients and I'm not misleading my readers and viewers.


 I proved that you have.  It's right there on the first page of this thread.  Anyone who reads the thread will know this.  

I know that your trico colleagues are reading this thread, and in particular, that the new owner of the website is.  Have you wondered why none of them have weighed in here to defend the rhetoric you use to promote trico?  It's because they know that im right.  No one wants to tell the emperor he has no clothes.  

Sure, you might get one or two people that will say 'youre a shill' or 'joe is a saint', but you certainly wont see them discussing the specific criticisms i made, because they, like you, can see they are indefensible.





> I accept no advertising revenue from, nor do I work with any trico exclusive clinics.  I really cannot care less about the SMP industry.


 Why on earth do you keep saying 'i dont care about SMP', and claim to not be associated with it?  You LITERALLY created a website to promote SMP, where you specifically state that you are affiliated with trico clinics, and provide photos and videos of you visiting SMP clinics around the world.

I mean what exactly is going on here?  Did you take too much heat for the things you were saying, and you passed the website off to someone else, so that your words/endorsements can remain, but you can 'technically' claim that you aren't involved with SMP?  It literally makes no sense for you to say that you aren't involved with SMP.  Even your most ardent supporters must be scratching their heads over this.




> The funny thing is that I've not even touched my old website in nearly six months! Not bad for someone without a lot of SMP experience, eh?


 Getting hits on your website doesn't miraculously make the content reputable.  Websites devoted to proving the moon landing was a hoax, or that the earth is flat, get lots of hits as well.




> My old website will eventually be changed with new content and maybe a new direction. I don't know, but it isn't my place to dictate as such.


 Oh you think so?  You think someone would want to remove blatantly misleading advertising, so that they wont be associated with such tactics?  Imagine that.


Here is the additional input i referenced earlier:


I struggled for a long time with the decision about whether or not i should make such accusations towards you.  I know you wont believe it, but its the truth.  You make your livelihood in the hair loss industry, and i knew that the accusations i would make would be irrefutable because of how unbelievably careless you were with your rhetoric, and I am not one to lightly mess with other people's livelihoods.  Two things kept making me feel like i must speak up, however.  One was the seemingly unending positive success stories i read about on permanent SMP clinics' websites, including the one which is your number one target.  It is unquestionable that your myths and fear mongering are nowhere to be found in the feedback from reputable clinics, and i believe it is unethical to allow someone to dissuade people away from a clearly viable solution using such disingenuous methods.  Two was the fact that the input from Nicole, who i consider one of the worlds leading experts on SMP, supports my belief that permanent SMP is as viable as temporary.

I hesitate to bring Nicole into this, because i think she possesses a great deal of integrity in an industry where it is lacking.  She is one of the most ethical and honest people i have observed in this industry, and i admire her for it.  Additionally, the two of you have a more personal relationship than some random practitioner working for another company, so this could put her in an awkward position.  However, i guess the same could pretty much be said for any tricopigmentation technician, to a certain degree.  I dont require, expect, or even want, Nicole's input here (or really any other trico technician), because of the catch-22 situation they would be in with you.  That situation wouldn't exist if you had the resolve to back up your rhetoric and fight your own fight, but your response was to plug your ears and say 'i cant hear you', so here we are.

Let's compare what Joe and Nicole have said about permanent SMP:

Joe says that permanent SMP should be avoided, that the procedure is irrational and nothing about it makes sense, that the permanent industry attracts people that dont want to do good, that there is a high risk of ink confluence, that permanent SMP training is inferior to trico training, that permanent hairlines are unrealistic, that it evolved from permanent makeup/tattoos, etc.

Nicole says both permanent and temporary are great procedures, with their own pros and cons, and that both are viable when performed by a reputable company.  She says nothing about ink confluence, says nothing about the training differences between the two types of SMP, nor does she say that only permanent SMP evolved from permanent makeup/tattoos.  She was on The Bald Truth show to discuss SMP, and felt the need to post on the forum afterwards to clarify that she does not dislike permanent SMP, because of how one sided the episode seemed against permanent.

Joe also trashes the permanent company he referenced earlier, and on his website he surmised multiple times that the reason they filed for bankruptcy a few months ago was because of "angry customers beating down their doors for full refunds", and said that it was good for consumers that they were out of business because it was "one less company that can cause damage to hair loss sufferers".  (The actual reason was that they were restructuring the company.) He also posted pictures of their work, with disparaging comments directed at them.

Nicole publicly recommends that permanent company, as well as its previous employees, stating on *this* very website:




> For permanent SMP, you closest reliable clinic would be HIS in Chicago.


 and on another website:




> I think the most consistently good permanent SMP work that I have seen done is by former techs from HIS, Vinci, and NHI
> 
> ...
> 
> I was trained in permanent pigmentation and actually started my career in this industry in that field. I can tell you that today based on that inside knowledge if I have patients that want permanent pigmentation I really only refer to previous HIS employees... The technique and pigments that they were trained with are far superior and much safer than those of some of the other more permanent companies (not including Vinci).


 Not only that, but she has LITERALLY partnered with that same company to start offering their version of permanent SMP at Shapiro Medical Group:




> Currently, we are only offering tricopigmentaiton at SMG. But, after completing an intense advanced training partnering with HIS we will begin offering an alternative permanent procedure hopefully by the end of the summer. This procedure will be also be "semi-permanent" but it will last closer to 2-5 years vs. 6 months to 24 months. We will be offering both the tricopigmentation and the HIS technique based on patient needs and qualifications.


 Joe, you are in almost *complete* opposition to one of the most experienced and knowledgeable people in the world, in regards to permanent and temporary smp.  Both in her opinions/observations of permanent SMP overall, and on her recommendations for who does reputable permanent work.  If you cant get on the same sheet of paper with your own expert, then why on earth are you handing out advice to the public?

So what is going on here Joe?  

Is the problem that Nicole, and the other trico technicians that aren't repeating your claims, don't posses the experience that you do concerning permanent SMP?  And that the reason she recommends a treatment that doesn't make sense and should be avoided, as well as partners with a clinic that causes damage to hair loss sufferers, is because she doesn't have the knowledge you do?

Or is it that you became personally offended by the underhanded tactics used by the marketing arm of a popular permanent SMP company, and decided that you would fight fire with fire by creating a counter website using far more disingenuous rhetoric than they ever used, both against permanent SMP in general, and specifically towards that very company, but with the caveat of saying 'im admitting what im saying is biased' to give you an escape route if anyone ever called you on it?

I think it's the latter.




> in general I think the permanent side is sleazy.


 Joe, in this case you are the embodiment of those who you chastise - both in your responses to me in this thread, and with your website.  I realize that that may be a harsh accusation for some to hear on your home turf, but i challenge anyone who believes otherwise to objectively look at the information contained in this thread and reach a different conclusion.

This is the last post i will make in which i try to get Joe to justify the rhetoric he has engaged in.  I will make good on my promise to spread the word, though. 

A few final thoughts:

Im aware that i will automatically be considered the bad guy on this website for bringing forth such accusations against one of your own, but truly the only motive i have here is to ensure that people looking for hair loss solutions aren't misled by bad information.  Yes, i carry a harsh tone towards Joe at this time, but that is because i am so disappointed in his behavior on this matter.  I dont feel that anyone is immune from being held accountable for their words, no matter how much positive work they have done for the community, or how public they make themselves.  

If you feel i have been disingenuous/misleading, or have lied with my analysis here, then hold me accountable... but you're going to need to do more than merely calling me a shill. 

I commend the owner/admin of this site for allowing this discussion to take place.

I apologize to Nicole.

----------


## JoeTillman

Does anyone reading this dribble care, even a little bit? If so, speak up; maybe someone can care enough for me, too :Smile:  




> If you feel i have been disingenuous/misleading, or have lied with my analysis here, then hold me accountable... but you're going to need to do more than merely calling me a shill.


 Mmm, don't care enough to bother. Don't care about the lying, don't care about your analysis and actually don't care about you being a shill. Good for you, though, for being passionate. Since you said that was your last post, take care and God bless.

----------


## hairhairhair456

I said it was my last post trying to get you to atone for your sins, so to speak.  It was.  I didn't say i wouldn't speak to anyone again, that's just rude.  Im a pretty social guy, and I like chatting with folks.  How aboat their election, eh?  Heard any good jokes lately?

Still with those baseless accusations, though.  Geez.  What's wrong my man?  Upset that someone can play your game better than you?  Has the mighty Joe finally met his match?  It seems so.

And Joe, you aren't fooling anyone... if there were lies in my analysis you would have been tripping over your own feet to point them out.  Anyone who knows you, knows this.

You let us know when you get the courage to quote the information you supposedly only told to four people.  

I would feel sorry for whoever the guy is that you think i am, who has been unfairly attributed to my ace investigative work, but im pretty sure you made all that up in the hopes i would crack a little.  Takes more than that, old chap.

Until then you can keep making cute little jokes, like you haven't been rattled.   :Cool:

----------


## JoeTillman

> I said it was my last post trying to get you to atone for your sins, so to speak.  It was.  I didn't say i wouldn't speak to anyone again, that's just rude.  Im a pretty social guy, and I like chatting with folks.  How aboat their election, eh?  Heard any good jokes lately?
> 
> Still with those baseless accusations, though.  Geez.  What's wrong my man?  Upset that someone can play your game better than you?  Has the mighty Joe finally met his match?  It seems so.
> 
> And Joe, you aren't fooling anyone... if there were lies in my analysis you would have been tripping over your own feet to point them out.  Anyone who knows you, knows this.
> 
> You let us know when you get the courage to quote the information you supposedly only told to four people.  
> 
> I would feel sorry for whoever the guy is that you think i am, who has been unfairly attributed to my ace investigative work, but im pretty sure you made all that up in the hopes i would crack a little.  Takes more than that, old chap.
> ...


 The fact that you felt the need conduct "ace detective work" is kind of disturbing. Like, seriously, it's such a non-issue. It's like trying to debate me about my opinions on daffodils. Maybe if I didn't have a job I'd have more time to deal with you, but I'd also have to care enough to do so as well, which I don't. Meanwhile you think you're being smart and sassy with your snide remarks. I get it, cool. Good for you. 

Cheers!

----------


## Winston

This thread is currently in violation of our TOS and will be locked. Please take the time to read our Posting Rules and TOS.

----------

