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

Is this much news common?


#1

So I have only been interested in hair loss since I noticed I was balding (bout 9 months ago), so I am new to this whole scene…

But, every day I come here and there is some news relating to a discovery of some key gene or signaling protein that could have great potential etc etc. My question is, has this been an on going trend, or does it seem like there is an accelerated growth of understanding on the subject?


#2

This is not normal right now, no.

There has been a steady slow stream of small discoveries for the last 20-25 years. Most of it has amounted to little or nothing in practical application for us.

About once every 5-10 years, we hear of another massive curing/treatment in the works. It’s always a few years away.

You gotta realize that there are basically two possible timelines for medical research:

– “At least 10 years out” means they have a vague idea of some fresh aspect of the problem to try attacking. Usually this means nothing more.

– “Probably 5 years away” means they’re far enough along to be spending money fiddling around with this vague idea, but they still have no clue about the results or whether it will have any practical commercial application.

That’s about it. They ALWAYS say they’re very optimistic and err on the side of closer than reality. That is usually necessary just to keep their investors interested. This is pretty much the standard procedure for medical research in general. It’s not unique to the hair loss world.


#3

» So I have only been interested in hair loss since I noticed I was balding
» (bout 9 months ago), so I am new to this whole scene…
»
» But, every day I come here and there is some news relating to a discovery
» of some key gene or signaling protein that could have great potential etc
» etc. My question is, has this been an on going trend, or does it seem like
» there is an accelerated growth of understanding on the subject?

its fairly normal. Sometimes there are times when there is not a single news for some time( before xmass), but then they come in bursts.

Also what may be new to you in fact can be recycled news or an update on progress of something that has been reported many times before.

So I’d say there is one or two real news a month. 99% of the time the news is far more then 5 years away from anything useful for us. And any mice related research is > 10 years away from any commercial application for humans with 95% probability of failing.


#4

Yes, I also should have mentioned that.

Something growing hair on mice means virtually nothing for us.

Scientists have grown hair on mice so often that it’s driving us nuts and spurring all kinds of jokes about it. It seems like they can practically smear dogsh*t on a mouse and get hair/fur regrowing. But human scalp hair follicles are proving to have very little in common with what works on mouse fur (or any animal fur for that matter).


#5

» Yes, I also should have mentioned that.
»
» Something growing hair on mice means virtually nothing for us.
»
» Scientists have grown hair on mice so often that it’s driving us nuts and
» spurring all kinds of jokes about it. It seems like they can practically
» smear dogsh*t on a mouse and get hair/fur regrowing. But human scalp hair
» follicles are proving to have very little in common with what works on
» mouse fur (or any animal fur for that matter).

I have only been following the research for a few months. Is there a difference between regrowing hair on a mouse and regrowing hair on human skin grafts on mice?


#6

» » Yes, I also should have mentioned that.
» »
» » Something growing hair on mice means virtually nothing for us.
» »
» » Scientists have grown hair on mice so often that it’s driving us nuts
» and
» » spurring all kinds of jokes about it. It seems like they can
» practically
» » smear dogsh*t on a mouse and get hair/fur regrowing. But human scalp
» hair
» » follicles are proving to have very little in common with what works on
» » mouse fur (or any animal fur for that matter).
»
» I have only been following the research for a few months. Is there a
» difference between regrowing hair on a mouse and regrowing hair on human
» skin grafts on mice?

Very minimal. in fact human skin grafts are imho even easier to grow hair on.

The mice is immunosuppressed in order not to reject the human skin graft. Its been proven that if you take your bald follicle from your bald head (the one that has just tiny little vellous invisible hair in it) and plant it onto such immunosuppresed mice, the follicle will regenerate into full strength on its own.

Basically the issue is that our balding IS (or very much seems to be) organ rejection (follicle is an organ). And immunosuppresed mice dont reject organs.

This kinda explains why all mouse research fails in the end on humans. Unfortunatelly this is how science works. They cant just start applying experimental drugs on humans. So I guess they just hope that once they stump upon something that will work even for us.


#7

»
» The mice is immunosuppressed in order not to reject the human skin graft.
» Its been proven that if you take your bald follicle from your bald head
» (the one that has just tiny little vellous invisible hair in it) and plant
» it onto such immunosuppresed mice, the follicle will regenerate into full
» strength on its own.

debris, have you got a link for a study about this ?


#8

» »
» » The mice is immunosuppressed in order not to reject the human skin
» graft.
» » Its been proven that if you take your bald follicle from your bald head
» » (the one that has just tiny little vellous invisible hair in it) and
» plant
» » it onto such immunosuppresed mice, the follicle will regenerate into
» full
» » strength on its own.
»
» debris, have you got a link for a study about this ?

To be honest I dont, this is much cited fact on every hair loss board but I never even tried to find the study myself. Maybe JTelecom or some of the senior guys may dig it out for you.


#9

I’ve also read that it’s true. Immune system suppression (at least when it’s done in a huge way) causes miniaturized hairs to regenerate.

But what these guys fail to mention about the Folica tests, is that the Folica skin grafts on mice DIDN’T ORIGINALLY HAVE ANY FOLLICLES ON THEM before the experiment.