[quote]Given that the synthesis of PGD2 may be androgen dependant, please, tell us why this explanation is not satisfactorily?
[postedby]Originally Posted by Emin Tuncay Ustuner[/postedby]
It should also explain why DHT increases in balding scalp. If you cite the study showing that the synthesis of PGD2 is androgen depended I can comment further on it.
[postedby]Originally Posted by walrus[/postedby]
From Garza et al., 2012 (Prostaglandin D 2 Inhibits Hair Growth and Is Elevated in Bald Scalp of Men with Androgenetic Alopecia)
Quote: “Intriguingly, Ptgds is a highly testosterone-responsive transcript
(30, 31), which further suggests its importance in AGA.”
The relevant references are:
30. H. Zhu, H. Ma, H. Ni, X. H. Ma, N. Mills, Z. M. Yang, Expression and regulation of lipocalin-
type prostaglandin D synthase in rat testis and epididymis. Biol. Reprod. 70, 1088–1095
(2004).
31. N. S. Treister, S. M. Richards, T. Suzuki, R. V. Jensen, D. A. Sullivan, Influence of androgens on
gene expression in the BALB/c mouse submandibular gland. J. Dent. Res. 84, 1187–1192 (2005).[/quote]
Doctor, can you explain this comment in the Daily Mail, then?
The vast majority of men suffer from male pattern baldness and Dr Ustuner believes his theory is ‘unparallelled’ in its ability to explain this type of hair loss.
The answer, he says, is the weight of the scalp on the hair follicles.
In younger men, the scalp has sufficient fat tissue under the skin, and it is ‘capable of keeping itself well-hydrated,’ taking the pressure off the hair follicles.
[quote]All I’m thinking is, the doc is here talking, so why not quiz him politely? If he is wrong, he’ll talk his way out of it, but if we scare him away, we’re in no better a place than if we hadn’t.
I am no scientifically inclined enough to really comment. All I know is that his theory is at least worth hearing out.
[postedby]Originally Posted by roger_that[/postedby]
OK, needhairasap, you are right.
Actually, the last thing I suspected was that the doctor would appear here himself, and my comments questioning his mental competency were stupid.
I still strongly disagree with his theory, as I see all kinds of problems that a biomechanics expert, for instance, could have with it, not to mention an endocrinologist.
I think he is seeing this purely from the standpoint of a plastic surgeon, a profession that tends to see “the force of gravity” as the culprit in any anomaly that needs to be fixed.[/quote]
I’ll be honest roger, what’s interesting are those pictures from israel. they’re on The Tald Bruth forum
It’s funny how no one seems to be slinging mud at this the way they do at Dr. Nigam.
Admittedly these photos are more impressive than much of what Dr. Nigam has shown so far, but Dr. Nigam has also shown some good photos and his knowledge of the science is very solid, and increasing. But everytime he posts a set of photos, some nutcase says he’s switching people or photoshopping everything. He’s being crucified for a couple of mistakes that a website guy made.
Appreciate your response–sorry if I appeared impatient.
By extension, it seems that scar tissue is essentially the reason hair transplants work? Otherwise, transplanted hairs would also fall out in approximately the same amount of time it took the original hairs to fall out after they started becoming exposed to the “testosterone surge” most young men experience in their early teens, correct?
This contravenes a lot of what’s been posted on this board over many years–particularly, that transplanted follicles are DHT resistant (unlike the hairs they replace), and that’s why they work.
Follow up: If your theory is correct, then wouldn’t the state of a bald person’s scalp prevent what we’ve come to term “hair multiplication” from permanently working, since HM injections would not leave scar tissue like HT? What’s the best that could be hoped for in terms of a permanent solution?
I thjnk these pics are better and more conclusive than anything nigam has shown.
Not to say nigam isn’t onto something.
I guess some people did backgrou d checks and the inventors are legit published doctors…everything seems to be checking out…
Plus, it doesn’t surprise me they kept it under wraps…everything we hear about doesn’t work (histogen, replicel, aderans)… I lt wouldn’t be surprising to see somethjng that works break that mold of public knowledge.
If I didn’t have cure I’d make a fuss I was going to find it to raise cash
If I had a cure, I’d be quiet while developing it further.
I would suggest searching for patients who have been bed ridden for most of their lives and spent a large portion of their time lying down. AGA should practically be non-existent in such cases.
[quote]Anyway, Doc, I was merely curious in how you could empirically test this theory yourself, as I was fairly certain it could be done without astronauts.
[postedby]Originally Posted by Emin Tuncay Ustuner[/postedby]
The theory can be tested with a well designed clinical experiment. A good protocol could involve increasing the cushion in a test area in the scalps of volunteers and comparing the results with the control areas in the same individuals. I have been trying to conduct one.[/quote]
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by ESP2[/postedby]
Dr. Ustuner,
If your theory is correct, wouldn’t hair transplants (from sides and back to the top) necessarily thin out and fail just like original hair on the top does?[/quote]
Many people claim that they do after the same period of time that it took for your top to start thinning (i.e. ~16-30 years).
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by ESP2[/postedby]
Dr. Ustuner,
If your theory is correct, wouldn’t hair transplants (from sides and back to the top) necessarily thin out and fail just like original hair on the top does?[/quote]
[quote]Many people claim that they do after the same period of time that it took for your top to start thinning (i.e. ~16-30 years).
I wonder about the duration of HTs when applied to young men (eg., approx. 30 y.o.–when T levels are peaked out) compared to older men (say 60 y.o.–when T levels have subsided). I suspect we’d see the 60 y.o. keep HTs longer, perhaps the rest of their lives, and the HTs on 30 y.o. guys would start to thin out again after 15 or so years. If so, this would lend notable credence to Dr. Ustuner’s theory.
Hopefully, Dr. U will respond to my follow up post above on this (re the conceivable duration of HM injections). If periodic repeat HM injections are necessary, no big deal (assuming they are affordable). But maybe this also explains the repeated failures of techniques that work great on lab rats but not on humans scalps.
Wouldn’t the gravity theory not apply to monkeys, bears, horses and anything else with hair.
Also my scalp feels super itchy almost painful like someone has poured acid on it. I have lost half my hair from the front in less than a year. There is no doubt in my mind this mpb process is chemical not physical from gravity.
From Garza et al., 2012 (Prostaglandin D 2 Inhibits Hair Growth and Is Elevated in Bald Scalp of Men with Androgenetic Alopecia)
Quote: “Intriguingly, Ptgds is a highly testosterone-responsive transcript
(30, 31), which further suggests its importance in AGA.”
The relevant references are:
30. H. Zhu, H. Ma, H. Ni, X. H. Ma, N. Mills, Z. M. Yang, Expression and regulation of lipocalin-
type prostaglandin D synthase in rat testis and epididymis. Biol. Reprod. 70, 1088–1095
(2004).
31. N. S. Treister, S. M. Richards, T. Suzuki, R. V. Jensen, D. A. Sullivan, Influence of androgens on
gene expression in the BALB/c mouse submandibular gland. J. Dent. Res. 84, 1187–1192 (2005).[/quote]
Thank you. They do not bring something new to the table.
By extension, it seems that scar tissue is essentially the reason hair transplants work?
No, it may be only one of the factors (possibly a subordinate one) effective on the length of the life of hair transplants.
Follow up: If your theory is correct, then wouldn’t the state of a bald person’s scalp prevent what we’ve come to term “hair multiplication” from permanently working, since HM injections would not leave scar tissue like HT? What’s the best that could be hoped for in terms of a permanent solution?
Thanks very much for contributing your thoughts.
It does not matter which technique is used, if it does not relieve the pressure it can not provide a permanent solution.
Rather, my interpretation of your theory is that, in general, hair shafts have to fight against the force of gravity to emerge from the scalp during normal hair growth. The growth of the hair shafts on the top of the head is from inferior to superior (in a generally upward direction, albeit with some angling), which means that, to grow normally, they are fighting directly against the force of gravity, which pulls in a downward direction.
My interpretation of your view is that the scalp follicles which are most “disadvantaged” here are precisely the ones on the top of the head, and perhaps those at the vertex and hairline, because they are the ones which have to fight against the vector force of gravity most directly. In other words, the hairs on the crown and vertex are trying to grow directly upwards (albeit with some angling), while the force of gravity is acting directly downwards.
As I interpret your view, follicles on the sides and back of the head don’t have this same problem, because the direction of their hair growth is not exactly in the opposite direction to the force of gravity.
Therefore (in my reading of your theory), when the subcutaneous fat cushioning is removed generally from the scalp in a balding person, the basic physical disadvantage of the crown and vertex follicles is exacerbated and completly exposed to the deleterious downward force of gravity. The follicles on the sides and back of the scalp are not similarly disadvantaged, because of their fortunate positioning, and if subcutaneous fat is removed from those areas, it doesn’t have the same damaging effect.
Am I at least correct in my interpretation of your theory, and if not, could you please correct me?[/quote]
Your understanding of my theory is incorrect and in fact laughable. It explains your unwise comments (but can not grant pardon to offensive language) and shows that you have read only news stories. Please be informed that it is not me who writes the news stories. I am not responsible from their contents. You need to read my articles (and perhaps read up on related subjects that you may not have enough knowledge such as normal hair cycle) if you want to understand the theory. Then you may see that it does not ignore any discipline.
Two identical twins (monozygotic) share the exact same DNA. Both therefore carry the gene/s for male pattern hair loss. One twin started taking Dutasteride (dual alpha-5-reductase inhibitor) after he noticed he was losing hair. The other twin did nothing about his hair loss.
5 years on, the result is plainly obvious. The twin who took dutasteride kept his hair, while the other did not.
You cannot get a closer pair of lab test subjects than that. Both share the exact same DNA and therefore should theoretically go bald at the same rate.
So how does the doctor explain this?
DHT obviously is the culprit and dutasteride specifically inhibits both alpha-5-reductase iso-enzymes which convert testosterone into DHT.
Please elaborate on why you think this is the case.
Please remember that DHT, not testosterone, increases in balding scalp and the genes encoding the two isoenzymes that convert testosterone to DHT have been shown not to be associated with AGA. Also, despite extensive studies, any specific gene causing AGA has not been found yet. We do not know why DHT increases in balding scalp. This question is the most important question to understand AGA. We can not evade answering this critical question saying it is genetic anymore. Any explanation short of answering this question is not satisfactory.
The studies that you have brought forward show that testosterone up-regulates PDGS expression (in rat epididymis and mouse submandibular gland). Let’s presume that these studies are sound and let’s directly conclude without any further study or evidence that testosterone increases PDG2 levels in hair bearing skin in human beings. Nonetheless, it is obvious that these studies do not help explain why DHT increases in balding scalp.
Two identical twins (monozygotic) share the exact same DNA. Both therefore carry the gene/s for male pattern hair loss. One twin started taking Dutasteride (dual alpha-5-reductase inhibitor) after he noticed he was losing hair. The other twin did nothing about his hair loss.
5 years on, the result is plainly obvious. The twin who took dutasteride kept his hair, while the other did not.
You cannot get a closer pair of lab test subjects than that. Both share the exact same DNA and therefore should theoretically go bald at the same rate.
So how does the doctor explain this?
DHT obviously is the culprit and dutasteride specifically inhibits both alpha-5-reductase iso-enzymes which convert testosterone into DHT.[/quote]
It is very odd. You all seem curious, inquisitive individuals. But, you do not bother reading my article and learn about the theory before commenting on it. It could help you avoid the later embarrassment.
[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Emin Tuncay Ustuner[/postedby]
Please elaborate on why you think this is the case.
Please remember that DHT, not testosterone, increases in balding scalp and the genes encoding the two isoenzymes that convert testosterone to DHT have been shown not to be associated with AGA. Also, despite extensive studies, any specific gene causing AGA has not been found yet. We do not know why DHT increases in balding scalp. This question is the most important question to understand AGA. We can not evade answering this critical question saying it is genetic anymore. Any explanation short of answering this question is not satisfactory.
The studies that you have brought forward show that testosterone up-regulates PDGS expression (in rat epididymis and mouse submandibular gland). Let’s presume that these studies are sound and let’s directly conclude without any further study or evidence that testosterone increases PDG2 levels in hair bearing skin in human beings. Nonetheless, it is obvious that these studies do not help explain why DHT increases in balding scalp. [/quote]
Are you claiming that hair loss is not under genetic influence? It seems like you are falsely extrapolating. Simply because genes encoding for two proteins that are part of the overall process we call AGA are ‘not associated’ does not mean that downstream of this it can’t be underpinned by mechanisms that are also under genetic control. The phrase ‘genetic condition’ is indeed a blanket term, but this does not escape the fact that all conditions or biological processes consist of a complex interplay between both genetics and environment. You cannot take genetics out of the picture - with your - or for that matter, any other biological theory.
I maintain that you are being unduly dismissive of the Garza et al., 2012 PGD2 publication. How it possibly be argued that they brought ‘nothing to the table’ when not only did the group establish a causal (I emphasize again: not a correlative) effect of PGD2 on hair growth - but also the receptor (GPR44) responsible on the hair follicle.
Two identical twins (monozygotic) share the exact same DNA. Both therefore carry the gene/s for male pattern hair loss. One twin started taking Dutasteride (dual alpha-5-reductase inhibitor) after he noticed he was losing hair. The other twin did nothing about his hair loss.
5 years on, the result is plainly obvious. The twin who took dutasteride kept his hair, while the other did not.
You cannot get a closer pair of lab test subjects than that. Both share the exact same DNA and therefore should theoretically go bald at the same rate.
So how does the doctor explain this?
DHT obviously is the culprit and dutasteride specifically inhibits both alpha-5-reductase iso-enzymes which convert testosterone into DHT.
[postedby]Originally Posted by Emin Tuncay Ustuner[/postedby]
It is very odd. You all seem curious, inquisitive individuals. But, you do not bother reading my article and learn about the theory before commenting on it. It could help you avoid the later embarrassment.[/quote]
Dear Doctor,
What I’m showing you, in case you missed the point, is that the simplest explanation is the most likely one.
You claim DHT is upregulated to grow hair but paradoxically reduces the surrounding fatty tissue thereby causing hair loss. Hair growth is not some necessary condition like breathing or heart beat. Its loss does not cause the body to upregulate growth factors related to it through some hormonal mechanism. People who undergo laser hair removal do not see an upregulation in DHT. So what hard science is your theory even based on.
You’ll excuse me as I need the Cliff notes summarized version of your theory.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.