Original research theory: How Androgenetic Alopecia is a manifestation of insulin resistance and its connections with CVD & PCOS

[balda]

Fibrosis:
as an example, iodine has pretty solid anti-fibrotic effect. why it doesn't work for hairs?

...from notes:
https://www.researchgate.net/public...dine_A_case_report_An_interim_35_year_summary
Successful human scar regeneration by topical iodine A case report: An interim (3.5 year) summary

Control of regeneration and wound healing are scientific and clinical objectives. In 1997, topical Lugol's iodine solution applied daily for 3 days to a 50 year old facial scar lead to hyperemic scar tissue. As a working hypothesis, the author proposed topical iodine could initiate, control and complete human scar regeneration. In 2005, after collecting three more surgical scars, topical iodine applications began. Within 3 days all four scars started regenerating. Stopping topical iodine halted the process.
! Topical iodine induces hair growth in and around scars

dont think that iodin is toxic, it's "officially" used as an AA hairloss treatment:
youtube/gvuc9J-klgI

and for fun
https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2009125447A2/en

and some comments
"Just wanted to post some research I've been doing about all this. New hair growth continues with each passing day. Lots of Darker then peach fuzz growth. Peach fuzz growth at my peak(center of hairline) which didn't show any signs of life after 2 PRP treatments or over a year of Rogaine use."

"I never had luck with topical lugol's on the scalp and it actually led to an increase in calcification and hair loss when I used it."

"Actually it was also neglected on the conclusion and discussion of the study but as I talked to professor Sukesh he told me that betadine played a big role on the outcome and that he was thinking of making an editorial note on that subject. This was 3 years ago, and I don't believe he ever wrote an editor's note on that subject. "

 

[balda]

@randomuser1
near identical base protocol, just fyi:
https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...nce-and-its-connections-with-cvd-pcos.138444/
d3+k2+cod+mag+... and even nattokinase

 

[balda]

Would be nice to research what is behind the "estradiol" efficiency. How it works. It really works, by "really works" a mean something close to the picture below. It actually "revives" the skin functions.

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/exploring-the-hormonal-route-hair-life.109288

One of the principal assumption is that:
estradiol -> adiponectin UP -> dwat extension/anti-fibsosis DOWN -> happy hairs

NB.
in general, im interested in "morphology" and how to revive it.
lets assume that pathological process(s) killing hairs is about "metabolism" and "morphology". as hairs pathology is CUMULATIVE (beyond one hair cycle activity and so on!), it should have MORPHOLOGICAL changes (as a kind of "saved" state of it's bad semi-finished deeds). so to really revive hairs it's needed to revert patho changes in MORPHOLOGY. And why not to try to teach how to do it from something that can definitely do it - ESTRADIOL.

 

[healthyjoe]

It is hard to list them in isolation because pro-fibrotic and pro-calcification processes are partially overlapping (namely the ones related to insulin resistance). Only some are "exclusive", like scalp tension which is "only" pro-fibrotic.
If I still had to list them, it would be as follows:

Calcification (damaging):
- Primary insulin resistance
-- High carb/sugar intake
-- Insufficient physical exercise
-- insufficient magnesium (because of its effects on ATP generation)
- Secondary insulin resistance: Cortisol
-- Lack of sleep or inconsistent sleep
-- Stress
-- Overexercise (especially if below average BMI)
-- Crash diets, prolonged caloric deficit
- Secondary insulin resistance: Inflammation
-- Smoking
-- Omega-6 PUFAs
-- oxidized fatty acids
-- partially hydrogenated fatty acids
- impaired calcium metabolism
-- insufficient magnesium
-- insufficient vitamin D3
-- insufficient vitamin K2

Fibrosis (damaging):
- all of the ones listed under "Calcification (damaging)"
- scalp tension
- insufficient magnesium (because of its effects on muscle stiffness)

Calcification (healing):
- elimination of insulin resistance risk factors (primary and secondary)
-- exercise
-- diet
-- sleep
-- stress
-- stopping to smoke
- magnesium, vitamin D3, K2
- omega-3

Fibrosis (healing):
- Wounding plus massages plus magnesium (need all three together)
- Retinoids plus massages plus magnesium (need all three together)


There are several problems that make regrowth very difficult or impossible: The body's repair mechanisms usually do not reverse to "pristine" tissue. De-calcification show that it takes years to achieve even small improvements in blood supply calcification. I have listed a few studies in the PDF in the section "Vascular calcification reversal" on page 64 of version 0.4 of the PDF. But the calcification in our scalps does not only affect the blood supply but also the dermis through overspill. Additionally, central blood supply calcification "only" narrows blood vessels. The blood vessels in our scalp are capillaries. They can be fully destroyed by calcification, not only be narrowed. So central blood supply decalcification is already slow. On the scalp, it will be even slower or maybe even impossible.

Same for fibrosis. It's similar to trying to reverse scar tissue. It takes some pretty strong treatments (like topical retinoids) and takes a long time. But these are surface scars. In Androgenetic Alopecia, we are basically dealing with below-surface scar tissue. How do we resolve this? If we can resolve it at all it would need an elimination of scalp tension (massages plus magnesium) and, additionally, we also need to trigger tissue recreation (e.g. through wounding or retinoids).
By the way, my theory why some people had success with microneedling and some didn't is because some had higher and some had lower scalp tension. With tension, new tissue (after wounding) becomes fibrotic. Without tension, new tissue becomes non-fibrotic. Same with retinoids. But retinoids probably have trouble getting deep into the skin as well, so there are two issues with retinoids.

All in all, recovery/repair/regrowth is much, much more difficult than prevention.


No idea to be honest.

not true. Lookup spironolactone guy who regrew hairs on top of head after 6 years of taking that med. Mind you, he was in his mid 70s with a Norwood 7 classification and 45 years of balding. Princessrambo, who was a legend on this forum, with 12 years of balding, went from Norwood 7 to Norwood 2 in 7 months from a natural regimen. He took a boatload of supplements to make that happen.

 

[randomuser1]

Would be nice to research what is behind the "estradiol" efficiency. How it works. It really works, by "really works" a mean something close to the picture below. It actually "revives" the skin functions.

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/exploring-the-hormonal-route-hair-life.109288

One of the principal assumption is that:
estradiol -> adiponectin UP -> dwat extension/anti-fibsosis DOWN -> happy hairs

NB.
in general, im interested in "morphology" and how to revive it.
lets assume that pathological process(s) killing hairs is about "metabolism" and "morphology". as hairs pathology is CUMULATIVE (beyond one hair cycle activity and so on!), it should have MORPHOLOGICAL changes (as a kind of "saved" state of it's bad semi-finished deeds). so to really revive hairs it's needed to revert patho changes in MORPHOLOGY. And why not to try to teach how to do it from something that can definitely do it - ESTRADIOL.

I think there are different mechanisms at play with estradiol:
- Scavenging T and thus preventing conversion of T to DHT. Though this is likely not because of E2 itself but aromatase. Aromatase and 5ar compete for T.
- Influencing subcutaneous fat storage. Fat cell injection seems to boost hair growth a tiny bit, maybe this effect also comes into play when more subcutaenous fat is stored? Subcutaneous fat storage (vs. visceral) is also protective against insulin resistance or against quick fuel burn (which harms mitochondriae and produces ROS).
- Reducing tension by increasing cushioning.
- Estradiol is an anti-fibrotic factor in dermal tissue remodeling.

Might be any of these reasons or several. Just some ideas.

not true. Lookup spironolactone guy who regrew hairs on top of head after 6 years of taking that med. Mind you, he was in his mid 70s with a Norwood 7 classification and 45 years of balding. Princessrambo, who was a legend on this forum, with 12 years of balding, went from Norwood 7 to Norwood 2 in 7 months from a natural regimen. He took a boatload of supplements to make that happen.

Could you provide links?

@randomuser1
near identical base protocol, just fyi:
https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...nce-and-its-connections-with-cvd-pcos.138444/
d3+k2+cod+mag+... and even nattokinase

Hm, you linked to this thread, which link did you mean?

 

[curlwaves]

Only read most of the article. Very interesting.
I've been thinking about this too. I wouldn't even bother with the genetics crowd. It's so idiotic how people can hold on so strong to things and not even consider a potential of environmental factors.

It's more than likely a multifaceted pathology for a good amount of men.
Considering how many things can be effective Vs causative. We'll never fully know if that one person might be doing something that protects them even if their overall life is poor.

If you're not willing to think out of the box you'll never get any alternative cure that's for sure.

About fructose you say it may be as bad as glucose. I believe I remember a few studies on fructose Vs glucose drinks. Showing that fructose was worse especially for the liver.

I also think a big part is we've been eating less fresh and more preserved food. From a survival standpoint I get it. But health wise it's a no in my opinion. The way my skin cleared up reducing those foods and adding alot of fresh veggies and fruits with potent health effects like blueberries. You just don't get that from blueberry jam and it's something some people just don't or will not understand. Alot of things in these foods are important as well for metabolism. Adding extra fat and sugar in a way dilutes that beneficials Vs calories ratio. So I'm wondering if that also plays a roll.

 

[Db10]

How about fruit, is that bad or not