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

P2Y5 gene - Maybe a start


#1

Researchers have found the genetic basis of two distinct forms of inherited hair loss, opening a broad path to treatments for thinning locks, according to a pair of studies released Sunday.

Creeping baldness is a source of distress to tens of millions the world over.

Hair-challenged adults spend upward of a billion dollars every year on mostly bogus remedies in the United States alone, according to the Federal Drug Administration.

They also lavish at least as much on sometimes painful hair implants and other forms of more or less convincing hair substitutes.

Geneticist Regina Betz of the University of Bonn and her colleagues hunted down a gene – P2RY5 – that causes a rare, inherited form of hair loss called Hypotrichosis simplex.

They found their quarry, after six years of research, among families in Saudi Arabia.

It is the first receptor in humans known to play a role in hair growth, according to the study, published in Nature Genetics.

“Although Hypotrichosis simplex is very uncommon, it may prove critical in our search for an understanding of the mechanisms of hair growth,” said Betz.

The disease affects both men and women, who begin to go bald during childhood.

At fault is a genetic defect that prevents certain receptors on the surface of hair follicle cells from being correctly formed.

For the hair follicle to function normally, messengers must bind to these receptors, triggering a chain reaction in the cell interior.

The fact that a receptor plays a specific role in hair growth was previously unknown to scientists.

“We can now search selectively for related substances that may be used in therapies for very different types of hair loss,” said Ivar von Kügelgen of from Bonn’s Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology.

In the other study, Angela Christiano of Columbia University lead a team that found another mutation of the same gene that results in “woolly hair” – sparse, dry and tightly curled hair over the entire scalp.

Examining families in Pakistan, the researchers determined that the mutation is expressed in the inner root sheath of hair follicles, which anchor and shape individual hairs.

Until recently, many scientists assumed that mammalian hair follicles were a non-renewable resource.

The human head comes equipped with approximately 100,000 of these tiny, hair-generating organs, and once they stop working, it was thought, the scalp was doomed to gradual exposure.

A healthy individual loses around a hundred hairs a day, but they are normally replaced at the same rate.


#2

» Until recently, many scientists assumed that mammalian hair follicles were
» a non-renewable resource.
»
» The human head comes equipped with approximately 100,000 of these tiny,
» hair-generating organs, and once they stop working, it was thought, the
» scalp was doomed to gradual exposure.

This is confusing…they are not saying it but implying that the follicles can be regenerated. Can you provide the link?


#3

A hair study released on Sunday and a story that is pretty much just a modification of another story about some russian families and genetic mutation:

What an ingenious journalistic skill.

Even if 5% of it is true, it’s more than 5 years away.


#4

Saw it on the Drudge Report


#5

» A hair study released on Sunday and a story that is pretty much just a
» modification of another story about some russian families and genetic
» mutation:
»
» http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061128/HEALTH02/61128040
»
» What an ingenious journalistic skill.
»
» Even if 5% of it is true, it’s more than 5 years away.

I don’t think it is a modification since it named a different gene and another country, but I may be wrong.


#6

Personaly, I think this is the most important news in the history of hairloss research.


#7

» Personaly, I think this is the most important news in the history of
» hairloss research.

YEAH BABY YEAH!! if everything goes well, 10 years from now on the new cure based on this research will be just 5 years away


#8

YEAH BABY YEAH!! if everything goes well, 10 years from now on the new
cure based on this research will be just 5 years away
dude. seriously. what’s your problem?
You find a reason to be unhappy with EVERYTHING.

.


#9

» YEAH BABY YEAH!! if everything goes well, 10
» years from now on the new
» cure based on this research will be just 5 years away
» dude. seriously. what’s your problem?
» You find a reason to be unhappy with EVERYTHING.
»
» .

Unfortunatelly this is not unhapiness nor pessimism. Accept the truth and do not allow false hopes to take over your life.


#10

Unfortunatelly this is not unhapiness nor pessimism. Accept the truth and
do not allow false hopes to take over your life.
I’m pretty sure I know pessimism when I see it…

You don’t see me jumping for joy everytime I read a tidbit about hairloss research; I try to take it in strides. You also won’t see me take a page from your book - coming here casting doom and gloom on everything. That seems to be the general premise of your replies: biotech firms fail (yup. so what… many succeed). Everything will take 5 or 10 or 15 years more than what anyone else says (I didn’t know you had a magic eightball). Hair won’t get you chicks (nobody mentioned women until your post).

Seriously man. Lighten up.

.


#11

» Unfortunatelly this is not unhapiness nor
» pessimism. Accept the truth and
» do not allow false hopes to take over your life.
» I’m pretty sure I know pessimism when I see it…
»
» You don’t see me jumping for joy everytime I read a tidbit about hairloss
» research; I try to take it in strides. You also won’t see me take a page
» from your book - coming here casting doom and gloom on everything. That
» seems to be the general premise of your replies: biotech firms fail (yup.
» so what… many succeed). Everything will take 5 or 10 or 15 years more
» than what anyone else says (I didn’t know you had a magic eightball). Hair
» won’t get you chicks (nobody mentioned women until your post).
»
» Seriously man. Lighten up.
»
»
»
» .

You seem to have a fundamental lack of scientific understanding. The process from research to product is easily a 10 year cycle or longer. Once things get to trial, expect at least 5 years, and usually more - and that’s assuming success. The distance from stage 2 trials to product is - at a minimum - 3 years.

We would all like a cure next year, and its hard not to get excited about it. But be realistic. There will almost certainly be something that resembles a cure within our lifetime, but for most of us, that may mean hair in our 40’s, not 30’s.

I find this technological epoch particularly frustrating. There is so much promise and potential in modern science, and I have no doubt that it will deliver everything imagined and far more. But unfortunately, those benefits are probably 1-2 generations away. I’m not talking about something as trivial as hairloss treatments; I’m discussing revolutionary discovery.


#12

Skiploss
You seem to have a fundamental lack of scientific understanding. The process from research to product is easily a 10 year cycle or longer. Once things get to trial, expect at least 5 years, and usually more - and that’s assuming success. The distance from stage 2 trials to product is - at a minimum - 3 years.

We would all like a cure next year, and its hard not to get excited about it. But be realistic. There will almost certainly be something that resembles a cure within our lifetime, but for most of us, that may mean hair in our 40’s, not 30’s.

I find this technological epoch particularly frustrating. There is so much promise and potential in modern science, and I have no doubt that it will deliver everything imagined and far more. But unfortunately, those benefits are probably 1-2 generations away. I’m not talking about something as trivial as hairloss treatments; I’m discussing revolutionary discovery.

Do I have lack of scientific understanding? Probably; afterall, I’m not a scientist. I do know one thing that you don’t however - You won’t get an answer if you don’t know the question. This article answers a small part of the question - mainly, what contributes to baldness.

.


#13

So here’s what wikipedia says about cancer drugs:

On average, about 8 years pass from the time a cancer drug enters clinical trials until it receives approval from regulatory agencies for sale to the public. a new cancer drug has, on average, at least 6 years of research behind it before it even makes it to clinical trials.

So from discovery to the market it takes 14 years for a cancer drug.

Now consider that hair loss is not critical nor terminal nor even painful illness.


#14

This is also on MSNBC.com