DHI (Direct Hair Implanter) Method

Now, what’s the reality? Well, claims 1-4 are questionable, and claim 5 is probably true. Let’s cover them one by one:

1. This is simply not true, the hair is still handled by forceps, removed by the clinician post-excision (unless using a harvesting device such as the Wireless WAW FUE System or ATERA) and the pens still have to be loaded with the hair, which means the techs are handling the graft.
2. This is a two-fold answer. If you are using the Choi with the needle, it may be  slightly faster because you are making the sites as you go. However, the pens still have to be loaded, and the old DHI tools did not make sites at all. Either way, it’s a negligible difference, if any. 
3. This is a fallacy. You still need a needle to puncture the tissue and implant a graft in the recipient site. Unless the doctors or techs are inexperienced, this will cause the same trauma.
4. Well, it certainly doesn’t create better angling by itself. The clinician who is making the sites still has to angle appropriately. If anything, the pen gives you less control over the implantation angles and depths in a scenario where human input is most beneficial. 
5. This is true, but would you want someone who is inexperienced working on your head for the only hair transplant procedure you may ever have.