Recent content by Boba155

If you were to completely destroy permanently every androgen receptor in your hair follicles, down to the last dermal papilla cell/stem cell... Would your hairs miniaturize? It seems like the only way they would still miniaturize is if androgens have an INDIRECT effect on the hair follicles...

Nope, not what I was looking for. Anyone else?

Can anyone provide me a study of this? I.e. Something that proves that androgens from the blood stream have a DIRECT effect on the hair follicles, such as entering the follicles and binding with enzymes there to produce growth inhibitors. Thanks.

Dumbass. I'm sorry your not intelligent enough to understand what we are talking about. Maybe try, oh I don't know, actually reading a medical journal for once? "Rambling incoherent posts"... what a joke, if you can't understand something, simply don't meddle in it. You will only make yourself...

This is the reason male pattern baldness will not be cured for at least another fifty years. This post perfectly captures it. Simply put, the general public is not smart enough to grasp current scientific research, and nor do they even want to try. Quite sad really.

Bryan, I working a lab. Believe me, it would be very easy. Safe? Perhaps, perhaps not.

Well you should. If it's the ARs in the hair follicles themselves, then we can cure it with gene therapy. If not, we are sh*t out of luck, because disabling ARs systemically would literally be castration.

Oh really? Prove it.

You misunderstand Bryan. I am wondering wether it is androgens binding to the receptors inside the hair follicles is what causes miniaturization, rather than binding to AR's in close proximity to the hair follicle (which Nordstrom did say was a possibility!).

Actually no, I was talking about receptors, and I'll explain why below. Secondly, I was referring to the study that Freakout posted showing that vellus hairs when transplanted onto mice grew terminal. Nordstrom's study showed that transplanting vellus hairs grew vellus. There is a discrepancy...

Yes, Bryan, I am talking about receptors generated inside the hair follicles. And Bryan, while Nordstrom's study is excellent, Freakout's posted studies directly contradict it. Any opinions or explanations? By the way Bryan, do not think in any way that I am opposing you. I support you...

All I am asking for is someone to show a study that indicates androgens in the hair follicles directly influence hair growth/miniaturization . I am worried that scalp or skull androgen activity is the real problem, stemmed from Freakout's studies posted. If androgens in the hair follicles...

Direct androgen action upon hair follicles. i.e. the study where a miniaturized hair was taken off balding scalp, placed onto mouse scalp, and then it grew a thick terminal hair.

Bryan: I'm not joking. Please disprove it, no in vitro studies please. :) And finasteride, I do agree SOME of his theories are stupid. However this one actually has some evidence behind it.

Why do you all flame on Freakout? As far as I can see, he has presented legitimate studies which support his claim that androgens do not have a direct effect on the hair follicle. You all are still unable to disprove those studies. Yet you all still blast him for being "ignorant". In Vitro...