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

Its amazing how


#1

The skin on the side or back produces healthy hair and inches from the skin on the scalp where the follicles dies. Maybe they need to see why DHT doesn’t kill the follicles on the side or the back and it does on the top of the head, the answer to that would open the door to the cure. :stuck_out_tongue:


#2

» The skin on the side or back produces healthy hair and inches from the skin
» on the scalp where the follicles dies. Maybe they need to see why DHT
» doesn’t kill the follicles on the side or the back and it does on the top
» of the head, the answer to that would open the door to the cure. :stuck_out_tongue:

I have always been amazed by this. Here are two hairs. One falls out, the other does not. Compare. What’s different? That’s the cause. And yet, it seems that’s not the case.

Its clear we still don’t fully understand how DHT affects hair. Its certainly involved, but if it were the only mechanism, Dut would give everyone a full head of hair. I’m starting to think that there is some autoimmune component, and that it resides higher up on the chain of cause and effect than DHT does.


#3

Many doctors say it is because follicles on the sides and back are DHT resistant but i am sure they over simply this. They don’t know any better than we do so they feed us this theory.


#4

We don’t know sh*t about what’s really happening.

The lion’s share of the info we really know has been learned by zillions of different operations doing unconnected studies. They’re each taking a substance they’ve already got rights over and trying to prove to the FDA that it’ll do some good against the effects of the problem. So the final result is that way too much of everything we know about MPB has been reverse-engineered out of product studies.


#5

» » The skin on the side or back produces healthy hair and inches from the
» skin
» » on the scalp where the follicles dies. Maybe they need to see why DHT
» » doesn’t kill the follicles on the side or the back and it does on the
» top
» » of the head, the answer to that would open the door to the cure. :stuck_out_tongue:
»
» I have always been amazed by this. Here are two hairs. One falls out,
» the other does not. Compare. What’s different? That’s the cause. And
» yet, it seems that’s not the case.
»
» Its clear we still don’t fully understand how DHT affects hair. Its
» certainly involved, but if it were the only mechanism, Dut would give
» everyone a full head of hair. I’m starting to think that there is some
» autoimmune component, and that it resides higher up on the chain of cause
» and effect than DHT does.

DUT most likely would give everyone a full head of hair IF it reduced DHT by 100% but if what I read is correct it only reduces DHT at best by about 50%


#6

» The skin on the side or back produces healthy hair and inches from the skin
» on the scalp where the follicles dies. Maybe they need to see why DHT
» doesn’t kill the follicles on the side or the back and it does on the top
» of the head, the answer to that would open the door to the cure. :stuck_out_tongue:

hair on the sides and back is not that DHT resistant, ever look at a NW7 you think the hair on the sides and back is healthy just because its not bald and there is still some hair there?

most guys with hair that far gone could let their sides and back grow for a year, and i doubt it would grow 2 inches


#7

Not true. Even if you were castrated, you would not grow all your hair back. Castrastion will prevent further hairloss, but if you’ve already lost it, you won’t get it all back. The longer it’s been gone, the less likely it is to grow back. That’s why fin/dut and any other things that work on the DHT component have good results in halting hairloss, but mixed to minimal results in growing hair. Most people that grow hair with fin/dut have lost their hair within the last 3 years. Those whose hair has been gone for 10 or more years will not see much regrowth.


#8

» Not true. Even if you were castrated, you would not grow all your hair
» back. Castrastion will prevent further hairloss, but if you’ve already
» lost it, you won’t get it all back. The longer it’s been gone, the less
» likely it is to grow back. That’s why fin/dut and any other things that
» work on the DHT component have good results in halting hairloss, but mixed
» to minimal results in growing hair. Most people that grow hair with
» fin/dut have lost their hair within the last 3 years. Those whose hair has
» been gone for 10 or more years will not see much regrowth.

That still doesn’t change the fact that a man who has bee completely bald for decades still has the same amount of Follicles has someone with a teenage hairline, and those follicles never die.


#9

If the side and back are DHT resistant, then why won’t they research it, peel into the skin if they have too and see what chemicals if any are in the healthy skin and in the skin on the scalp. The question is simple, why is the skin only couple of inches from the scalp resistant to DHT whats in it that causes the hair to grow.

You know sometimes the most simple answer maybe overlooked but all these crazy researches.

» Many doctors say it is because follicles on the sides and back are DHT
» resistant but i am sure they over simply this. They don’t know any better
» than we do so they feed us this theory.


#10

All we need is an answer why the hair on the side and back does not fall and why on the top does. I know I know the answer is DHT resistance, but guess what that answer is open ended answer.

Why are they DHT resistance, is it something in the skin on the side or back that causes the reistance, is a chemical which we produce on the side or back which is lost or gone on the top of the head? Maybe they need to open up the skin get to the root of the skin which comes from the back or side and compare with the skin on the scalp and see what are the difference, what has changed on the skin from the scalp.

Think about it for a second, if they can find out what is really happening to the layer of skin on the side or back and try to compare it to the skin from the scalp they may have an answer.


#11

» If the side and back are DHT resistant, then why won’t they research it,
» peel into the skin if they have too and see what chemicals if any are in
» the healthy skin and in the skin on the scalp. The question is simple, why
» is the skin only couple of inches from the scalp resistant to DHT whats in
» it that causes the hair to grow.
»
» You know sometimes the most simple answer maybe overlooked but all these
» crazy researches.

WTF ? It’s not the surrounding skin but the follicle itself


#12

» If the side and back are DHT resistant, then why won’t they research it,
» peel into the skin if they have too and see what chemicals if any are in
» the healthy skin and in the skin on the scalp. The question is simple, why
» is the skin only couple of inches from the scalp resistant to DHT whats in
» it that causes the hair to grow.

It’d be really nice if some actual hairloss researcher once-in-a-while came here to ask us something or research this matter from bald men’s point of view. But all these researchers have this DHT theory and they keep looking at it from that angle, without paying much attention to the fact that after a person hits NW5-6 even hormone therapy doesn’t work. There is obviously some other signaling/hormone involved in the picture, but the researchers just aren’t interested.

The only hope I have is, quite ironically a woman, “Elaine Fuchs”. She is the only one that I know of who is actively studying(and publishing) research regarding pathways/signaling involved in hair regeneration/cycling etc. The other person that I know who is looking at it from a genetic angle is also a female doctor at columbia univeristy.

All men that I know of Ken Washink, Paul Kemp, George Cotsarelis etc are interested in hairloss just because of money and the so called cure we’re gonna get from them is basically a better-than-HT job, Not really a cure in the sense that they’ve figured out the underlying condition/problem. This is really worrying for me because baldness has been co-related with Diabetes, heart attacks and prostate cancer. There obviously is something messed up in our body that needs to be figured out & treated.

I’m absolutely serious about this, I think we should at least write a petition to the president to focus some money on hairloss research, I bet if we can get plenty of signatures the president would at least notice & hopefully take some action. Right now the mindset in scientific community is Not positive at all regarding hairloss research. Hell, even Cotsarelis laughed when he said something along the lines of trying to get funding for hairloss research - doesn’t happen. While us(tax-payers) are suffering from a disease which has been proven to co-exist with leading killers of men in this country. It’s a shame that the society puts us down when we ask for hairloss research, we’re told that the country is at war, there are homeless people etc etc etc. But at the same time millions/billions of dollars are spent to research insects & animals, save these stupid corporations from bankruptcy, and god knows what.

If it weren’t for few companies interested in making money, we’d really have no hope at all for a cure. I know many people objected to the idea of starting an organization BUT is anyone geniuely interested in writing a petition to the president?? What’s there to lose?


#13

Well when you transplant hair from the back to the front, is new skin transplanted as well, and why do those new transplants never fall out?


#14

Good question, then it has something to do with what is around the follicles?

» Well when you transplant hair from the back to the front, is new skin
» transplanted as well, and why do those new transplants never fall out?


#15

Getting “hair” transplants is basically just getting a bunch of chunks of skin transplanted. Most of that “follicular unit” mumbo-jumbo gets said with an eye towards instilling the patient with some respect & confidence in the method and de-emphasizing the crude nature of the work.

Of course the chunks are trimmed down as close to being only the follicles themselves as it’s feasible to do. But you can’t just hack out a follicle with surgical tools and expect to successfully remove ALL evidence of the skin tissue around it. Not unless you’re willing to err on the side of cutting into the follicle itself, and they can’t do that without losing any decent graft-survival rates.

The donor grafts survive the androgen assault because they’re genetically different from the ones that don’t.

If you wanna argue that this is a skin difference, fine. I guess if you transplanted a chunk of donor-area skin into the front of the hairline that didn’t have follicles already in it, and then by some miracle you caused it to form brand-new follicles . . . then those new follicles forming on the transplanted donor skin would almost surely have the androgen resistant characteristics of the donor area.

But the difference still seems to basically be a product of the inner workings of the follicle itself.


#16

I wonder if rather than DHT, it has something to do with the cells in the hair follicles undergoing apoptosis.


#17

Androgenic alopecia: A counterproductive outcome of the anabolic effect of androgens.
Med Hypotheses. 2009 May 22.

Androgenic alopecia: A counterproductive outcome of the anabolic effect of androgens.Soni VK.

Androgenic alopecia is the commonest type of baldness. It is known to be caused by androgens, but the pathogenesis is not clearly understood. A lot of other factors are also suggested to be responsible, but many questions remain unanswered. This paper proposes a comprehensive theory, which explains how the normal anabolic effects of androgens which are responsible for hair growth become counterproductive in the scalp of some people leading to baldness, though androgens do not have any particular antagonism towards the hair follicles. It describes how androgens mediated protein deposition in the scalp tissues results in structural changes which leads to miniaturisation of hair follicles and thereby turn the hair vellus. It also explains other aspects of androgenic alopecia. This theory for the first time, spell out the steps involved in the progression from recession of hairline to complete baldness.

http://rapidshare.com/files/243116135/sdarticle.pdf.html


#18

» http://rapidshare.com/files/243116135/sdarticle.pdf.html

rooster, the link is Not working. The message says that the download limit has been reached.

Upload the file at hairsite, just use the the upload button on the right of message editor.


#19

rooster
can you add the document to your post?

Thank you


#20

rooster, the link you posted is NOT working. Please upload the pdf on hairsite.