Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

Any updates on "Slaphead" - The guy who did phenol peels and reported regrowth


#1

I read somewhere that there used to be a poster on hairsite “slaphead” back in 2002. He said that he wanted to get rid of some scar from the back of his head because he was slick bald and the scar stood out. So he did a phenol peel on his scalp (caution: thats a very deep peel!) and saw new hair growth…his later posts said that he saw considerable regrowth after doing numerous phenol peels…however thats where the story ends. There is no proof, no pics, and no sign of “slaphead”.

Does anyone know what happened to him? was he a fra-ud? Since he claimed regrowth from peels back in 2002, he definitely wasn’t inspired by Cotsarelis’ work so probably wasn’t making claims just for the h3ll of it. I’m especially interested in his claims because he said that he was seeing new terminals hairs and fuzz all over his scalp.

So any old posters know what happened to that guy? Bryan, hairsite?


#2

» I read somewhere that there used to be a poster on hairsite “slaphead” back
» in 2002. He said that he wanted to get rid of some scar from the back of
» his head because he was slick bald and the scar stood out. So he did a
» phenol peel on his scalp (caution: thats a very deep peel!) and saw new
» hair growth…his later posts said that he saw considerable regrowth after
» doing numerous phenol peels…however thats where the story ends. There is
» no proof, no pics, and no sign of “slaphead”.
»
» Does anyone know what happened to him? was he a fra-ud? Since he claimed
» regrowth from peels back in 2002, he definitely wasn’t inspired by
» Cotsarelis’ work so probably wasn’t making claims just for the h3ll of it.
» I’m especially interested in his claims because he said that he was seeing
» new terminals hairs and fuzz all over his scalp.
»
» So any old posters know what happened to that guy? Bryan, hairsite?

Its hairsite…any questions :slight_smile:

This guy is right now banging some chicks with his millions of dollars ^^


#3

so doesn’t anyone know about “slaphead”?


#4

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20060241696.pdf

This is a very interesting patent and was discussed last year. This guy also claims that chemical peel(or other similar method) that removes about 1mm of the upper skin layer stops hair loss and even causes hair regrowth.

I tried a lot but couldn’t find any contact info of the guy i.e. email, phone etc. Can anyone lookup his info somehow? and maybe contact him as well regarding this patent.

Btw, I found following facts mentioned in his patent(background) very interesting and encouraging scientific info:

  1. Pattern hair loss is often classified as reversible considering that hair follicles are present and cycling even in a bald scalp (Sinclair R D, Dawber R P. Androgenetic alopecia in men and women. Clin Dermatol. 2001 March-April; 19(2):167-78).

  2. Minitaurized hair follciles of pattern alopecia can quickly regenerate once removed from human scalp and can grow as well as or better than terminal follicles from the same individual (Krajcik R A, Vogelman J H, Malloy V L, Orentreich N. Transplants from balding and hairy androgentic alopecia scalp regrow hair comparably well on immunodeficient mice. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003 May; 48(5):752-9).

  3. Many pseudo vallus follicles can be identified in the dermis, indicating that follicles are minitaurized rather than destroyed. Pseudo vallus hairs are in a presence of arrector pili muscle and angiofibrotic streamers as difference to regular vellus hairs. (Sinclair R D, Dawber R P. Androgenetic alopecia in men and women. Clin Dermatol. 2001 March-April; 19(2):167-78).


#5

I did several TCA peels with no apparent effect.

I wonder if phenol peels are deeper.

Anyone can compare the two of them?


#6

» I did several TCA peels with no apparent effect.

how bald are you? did you notice any change in your scalp skin after peels? i.e. thining of skin, more shiny, etc?

» I wonder if phenol peels are deeper.

Yes, phenol peels are indeed deeper…the slaphead guy also achieved results with phenol peels. The guy in patent talks about removal of at least 1mm thick skin, which can only be achieved via phenol peels.


#7

»
» how bald are you? did you notice any change in your scalp skin after
» peels? i.e. thining of skin, more shiny, etc?
I noticed nothing special.
»

I am willing to try phenol peeling on my scalp. I bought tca peeling from aamzon.com but I can’t find any phenol peeling.

Could someone help me find an online shop for phenol peeling? Thanks.


#8

» I am willing to try phenol peeling on my scalp. I bought tca
» peeling from aamzon.com but I can’t find any phenol peeling.
»
» Could someone help me find an online shop for phenol peeling? Thanks.

I think you should consult a professional for doing phenol peel as its very strong…and if done inappropriately could cause scarring. Also, people with tanned/darker skin tones tend to develop hypo/hyper-pigmentation issues. So proceed only if you’re light-skinned!


#9

» So proceed only if you’re light-skinned!
My skin is so light that Sun burns me and I can’t stand it so I have vitamin D deficiency and as a result sleeping disorders (but that is another subject).

Anyone can post information about this phenol system? Is there just one type of phenol? Different % as with TCA? Where can they be bought?


#10

No interest at all in trying this test.


#11

» http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20060241696.pdf
»
» This is a very interesting patent and was discussed last year. This guy
» also claims that chemical peel(or other similar method) that removes about
» 1mm of the upper skin layer stops hair loss and even causes hair regrowth.
»
» I tried a lot but couldn’t find any contact info of the guy i.e. email,
» phone etc. Can anyone lookup his info somehow? and maybe contact him as
» well regarding this patent.
»
» Btw, I found following facts mentioned in his patent(background) very
» interesting and encouraging scientific info:
»
» 1. Pattern hair loss is often classified as reversible considering that
» hair follicles are present and cycling even in a bald scalp
(Sinclair R
» D, Dawber R P. Androgenetic alopecia in men and women. Clin Dermatol. 2001
» March-April; 19(2):167-78).
»

I’m not surprised to hear the last one, considering that the experiments I have done on my hairline of this type (“Follica-DIY”) all had regrowth in a very wide area, and curiously enough in places where I really “shouldn’t” have any hear growing anymore. Apart from my widow-peak, the technically lowest parts of my hair are both from these kinds of experiments.

Even in my last trial which didn’t turn out very well, I still got 4-5 hairs 1-1.5 cm from the rest of the hairline. If I were to make an approximation, it would be the hairline I had at 19 or younger.

It could be a few surviving strays, but the fact that they sprung up next to each other in a pretty unison patch would - in my opinion - rather point to the technique/execution being sub-par, rather than that that was all that could ever start growing again.

Not to hi-jack the thread, but I just wanted to pipe in about it. I am currently doing a variation of these kinds of tests on my temple, and I am taking some photographs during the thing, though for some curious reason I seem to have left off a “before” picture.

If my variation will yield anything significant, I am sure to post it. Not really holding my breathe, but you never know. It’s a slow process to only have yourself to experiment on.

On the topic of phenol-peel I would advice against it; the little I know about the field would suggest that this kind of peel is really going out of vogue, and in favour of mixes of medium peels. They peel smoother, so the results are more predictable without compromising on effect. Check out any good drug-store site for peels over 30% (usually TCA) and you’ll start find mixes with odd-sounding names.

Phenol-peel are unpredictable because they are harsh, and difficult to administer correctly. The patient is usually (always, probably) sedated, and they can typically only be done once. They will apparently often change the nature of your skin, so that it is much more sensitive to skin damage. It will often also make it much paler.

If this test-round works out well, I’ll go onto some 30% acid for larger areas. This time I used sand-paper again, and I’m using my temple for visibility.


#12

I already tried the TCA 30% several times. It did nothing.

I was thinking on applying phenol to a 1 square centimeter so even if the skin is affected it won’t really matter much.

If you tell me the experiment that worked on you I would try it. I have tried almost everything.


#13

» I already tried the TCA 30% several times. It did nothing.
»
» I was thinking on applying phenol to a 1 square centimeter so even if the
» skin is affected it won’t really matter much.
»
» If you tell me the experiment that worked on you I would try it. I have
» tried almost everything.

The main thing that I do, is pluck before I abrade. Through my experiments, I find this to be key. Currently, I am trying to find a working time-frame. So far I’ve done 4 experiments.

All but one abration is done with medium sand-paper, down to just before any speck of blood.

  1. Just abrading.
    Results - nothing, or slight peach fuzz here and there.

  2. Plucking hair 24 hours before abrading.
    Results - impressive, about 3 hairs for every plucked one, and growing in places where there has not grown hair in 8 years.

3 Plucking and abrading a few minutes after that.
Results - dissapointing in contrast to experiment 2. Same pattern as before though, with hair springing forth lower than they have been in about 8 years, just less uniform and less of it.

4 - Plucking hair and waiting 48 hours before abrading. This test is also checking out if there is any marked difference in doing smaller abrasion areas close to each other.
Results - currently waiting for them. Should turn up in about 2-3 weeks, with full effect coming in when the actual plucked hair grows back.

This is based on animal testing that noted a 10x increase in regenerated hair when plucked prior to abrasion. I’d spare my own home-spun theory as to why this is, and just leave that observation. I figured it might be something there, though the mice don’t have MPB to fight against as their hair is regenerating.

I have just come home after a short vacation, and I noticed hair from my dissapointing experiment (experiment 3) have become much more noticable now that some of the hair that was originally plucked are filling in.

Aside from the placement of the regenerated/rejuvenated dormant hair, I have found another pattern. Rejuvenated hair springs forth about 3 weeks after the skin has healed. They have so far all come out pretty much fully formed and very healthy, though this has a slight variance to it. The plucked hair grows back as thin or thicker than they were, but so far not weaker. They grow in several weeks after the rejuvenated hair.

I took some pictures so you can get a picture of what I am talking about. It’s not much, and keep in mind that I consider it a failiure, but only in regards to my other experiments. With perspective, it is pretty impressive that anything new really grows. I unfortunately do not have a “before” picture, but since I have very long hair now, it’s fairly easy to spot, as all the rejuvenated hair is markedly shorter. I also have fairly well-defined sharp temple-angles, and I wet all the hair down beside the rejuvenated ones so they would stand out better.

<img src=“http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/2703/img0515sk.jpg” alt="[/IMG]

[IMG=http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/2236/img0502h.jpg]">

http://yfrog.com/1qimg0509sj

http://yfrog.com/6wimg0513mjj

The links turned out a little weird, but just click on them. Now, I post them to illustrate something. In my mind this is experiment was dissapointing, but educational. They might be worthless for some, and impressive for others. I tried to take them at different distances, and if anyone wants more, I’d be happy to oblige (digital camera!)

I just want to add that they come about after plucking about 15-20 hairs, most of which was near-fuzz, or so brittle and withered that they just came out of the head with no effort and no pain whatsoever. The abrasion was done with a toothbrush, as I was experimenting with a method that would avoid using acids and sandpaper; both of which pretty much requires that you buzz your hair down.

For comparisons sake - the results from my second experiment gave twice as good results. Both in terms of numbers of hair, and most importantly, uniformity.

So very little effort, for results that were undoubtedly better than what I started with. The real heartache of this procedure, is down-time, and there seems to be no way around that. But I think there is loads of potential in it, and I’ll be the first to post if I get some cool results from my 4th experiment.

It is low-cost, and in my opinion are more impressive - and in shorter time - than what I usually see with propecia + minoxidil. At almost no cost, that’s hard to beat, and the fact that it seems to curiously rejuvenate hairs that are long gone is very interesting to say the least.

These very basic, DIY-experiments is why I think Follica is sitting on something really profound. Sure, these new hairs will not last forever, and the ones I rejuvenated first did eventually fall off, but they did so at the 2 year mark!

Who knows what could happen if this was done twice a year, all over your head, done correctly. Through my experiments, I am slowly edging towards finding that out, but it takes a long time to evaluate each approach.

It’s certainly food for thought though.

Edit: I also want to reiterate that I do not think you should run out and buy phenol. Not only is it hard to come by in the first place (because it’s really out of vouge), but it is painful without any sedation, and there is a marked risk for discolorization. If you’re just going to do a small area, use sandpaper and your sense.

I really don’t want people to run out, buy a lot of stuff and just try this hardcore. Everyones skin is different, and even though acid at a specific percentage is much easier in terms of gauging how much to use in order to break up X amount of skin-depth, each person will react differently to each strenght.

And on top of that, the fact that I’ve gotten so varied results with just manipulating time-frame, amount of hair plucked, the condition of the hair plucked, and lastly, depth/severity of skin damage says a lot of how complex this actually is, and considering the down-time, I really don’t want anyone to do it all over their head and loose 2 months of their life till it grows back, only to find out that the results were close to nill.

It’s very easy to do things out of desperation, so if anyone is interested, go slow. You have to get accostumed to your chosen abrasion-technique anyway, so there’s a lot of little details.

On the up-side - just getting any positive results in a very small area is pretty profoundly uplifting, and in my case, the desire to immediately go out and do it all over my head went down considerably once I actually saw that there’s something to this.


#14

Hello Orin,

thanks for your answer.

what do you exactly mean by plucking?
Do you pluck hair by hair? How many hairs do you pluck?
How do you exactly pluck your hairs? (sorry if this question seems stupid but englihs is not my native language and I want to make sure I understand what you do 100% right).

Can you give exact detail of the sandpaper you use so I buy exactly the same?
How many minutes do you use and how big is the area?

Thanks.


#15

I’d be curious to see if topical Tacrolimus ointment would affect this kind of experimentation.

Tacro does not function as a straightforward MPB treatment drug but it has been documented to have some hair effects. Its effects would probably be similar to a topical cyclosporine cream for our purposes.


#16

» I’d be curious to see if topical Tacrolimus ointment would affect this kind
» of experimentation.

I think baccy tried tacro, I remember him using an immunosuppresant in one of his experiements.

@Orin: can you highlight the rejuvenated hair in the pics? Btw, there used to be a woman “Scalpskinlady” or somethin like that on another forum. One thing she touted was that her peels decrease hairloss, and few guys who went to her for peels did report that as well. I think if you google her screen name you’ll find several posts from her, plus info about the peel she used - which btw didn’t require any downtime as it wasn’t strong enough so she used to do people’s entire heads with it, without removing any hair.


#17

It’s no secret that minor (non-bleeding) scalp damage can help hair growth slightly. Dermabrasion, chemical peels, needling, etc. Same principle. This phenomenon has probably been repeated more times by more people than any other type of HM experimentation.

The problem is that I’ve never seen or heard of anyone successfully compounding the results and amassing up a big visible difference. The first wounding session always regrows a number of hairs. But after a handful of repeat sessions on that spot it is never showing a whole lot more regrowth than it did after the first time.


#18

» It’s no secret that minor (non-bleeding) scalp damage can help hair growth
» slightly. Dermabrasion, chemical peels, needling, etc. Same principle.
» This phenomenon has probably been repeated more times by more people than
» any other type of HM experimentation.
»
» The problem is that I’ve never seen or heard of anyone
» successfully compounding the results and amassing up a big visible
» difference. The first wounding session always regrows a number of hairs.
» But after a handful of repeat sessions on that spot it is never showing a
» whole lot more regrowth than it did after the first time.

I think that coffee got an amazing regrowth. Not complete but amazing nevertheless.


#19

» » I’d be curious to see if topical Tacrolimus ointment would affect this
» kind
» » of experimentation.
»
» I think baccy tried tacro, I remember him using an immunosuppresant in one
» of his experiements.
»
» @Orin: can you highlight the rejuvenated hair in the pics? Btw, there used
» to be a woman “Scalpskinlady” or somethin like that on another forum. One
» thing she touted was that her peels decrease hairloss, and few guys who
» went to her for peels did report that as well. I think if you google her
» screen name you’ll find several posts from her, plus info about the peel
» she used - which btw didn’t require any downtime as it wasn’t strong enough
» so she used to do people’s entire heads with it, without removing any hair.

The rejuvenated part is the strip that is sticking out among the slicked back hair. I would high-light it if I wasn’t on a mac; I don’t seem to find an equivalent to MS paint. in all those pictures, you can see a 1,5 inch strip of hair that goes from the temple outwards, and then stops abruptly.

I am also seeing the early stages of regenerated hair in my new experiment-area. It’s hard to categorize results as bad/good news so I’ll just leave observations; spot-abration does little to nothing to improve results, so abrading the whole area might be preferable, which is if nothing else practical.

Hair is more strongly (as in plentiful) rejuvenated at the one spot that was slightly deeper abraded than the rest, and subsequently was red for close to 3 weeks as opposed to 1-2 weeks. I waited 48 hours, but I had better results the first time I abraded and waited 24 hours.

This is the all the same area, which makes it hard to draw any good conclusions from all of this. I wish I could tell you some duper-duper news, but all I seem to bring to the table is more complexity, which on the other hand is why it takes so long for actual medical trials to come up with anything good.

Did I rejuvenate hair this time, in the same area that I had rejuvenated before? Yes, but not as well as before, and most importantly, not in the same spots. Can you draw any definitive conclusions from this? No, because the dermabrasion was varied in depth , and it was primarily a test for duration post plucking, and wound size second. I’d say I plucked 30 hairs or so. Right now I have about 12-15 new hairs (they are very easily identifiable due to their quality and the pace at which they grow). As the actual plucked hair regrows, I’ll still end up with more than I had.

If I ventured to say anything, I’ say that wound depth is as important as the duration of time post plucking, which is also important, as you want the re-construction of plucked hair to coincidence with the later stages of wound healing (re-epithelialization).

So, nothing that we don’t already know, but the question remains if any of these endeavors (even if I find the sweet-spot of post-plucking to abrade) are really worth it. From one perspective, yes they are, because you’re bound to end up with more hair than you had (which both me and user “coffee” seemed to have experienced/learnt), but there is significant down-time, and deep (repeated) dermabrasion of the skin is something you can do at the most twice a year, and truthfully, probably less than that.

I’d say we’re stumbling on to the foundation that (hopefully) will make companies like Follica successful. What I’m toying around with is the base phenomenon. There is a big divide between promising phenomenon, and practical reality. If this was actually viable, people would do it, because it’s so cheap.

As it stands - in void of pin-pointed drugs and other stimulants - the phenomenon is slight; offering more promise than practical function.

I’ll probably keep toying with this to some capacity, but I have to keep wary of the duress I will cause on my scalp skin, as should everyone else. While I am sure some people might get good results from using this basic technique, I’d still say it is more trouble than it is actually worth - unfortunately.

It’s a harsh path to thread, with a lot of down-time, and for uncertain results. On the other hand; the fact that I have grown hair in places where I “shouldn’t” (through conventional MPB-theory) is encouraging.

I was supposed to start another experiment on a bigger area of my scalp, with deeper dermabrasion and the “tried and true” 24 hour waiting after plucking, but I’ve currently put those plans on the back-burner. I picked up my old laser helmet, modified the exposure time, and have been using it for a few months. When I cut my hair I was pleasantly surprised, so to be honest, while I still have much less hair than I would like, I’ve had a good enough response for me to post-pone any drastic experimentation and just enjoy life for a bit.

In a way it is a shame that so few seem open to discuss the limits of these DIY approaches, and would much rather bicker amongst themselves. It’s pointless for me to point any fingers as that only fuels the fires, but I don’t think it’s a stretch that there are more people like me, who try to figure some stuff out and actually test it, but who are dismayed by the current state of these forums and decide not to post anything.

If I keep getting “good enough” results with my lasers, I might lose any interest in what many might consider “cutting edge” DIY experimentation (these abrasion-experiments). It’s a shame, because shared knowledge is gained knowledge, and it beats out sitting on your hands waiting for what may come 5 years down the line.


#20

In their original patent didn’t they briefly mention that they could generate new follicles by wounding and applying minoxidil, has anyone tried this at home?surely it would be worth a try.