For bryan and Foote.

[Bryan]

Byran , there were quite a few google responses for minoxidil and facial swelling as far as online pharmacies selling the stuff listing it as one of the many side effects in some, but no study confirmation.

Michael, I'm not really concerned at the moment about facial swelling from minoxidil, or any other similar side-effects in other parts of the body. What I'm interested in is whether or not minoxidil causes a shift of fluid away from the scalp, which is integral to a claim that Stephen makes about how that drug works for hairloss.

I take it that nobody has seen any evidence for that claim?

Bryan

 

[Old Baldy]

I haven't.

 

[S Foote.]

Byran , there were quite a few google responses for minoxidil and facial swelling as far as online pharmacies selling the stuff listing it as one of the many side effects in some, but no study confirmation.

Michael, I'm not really concerned at the moment about facial swelling from minoxidil, or any other similar side-effects in other parts of the body. What I'm interested in is whether or not minoxidil causes a shift of fluid away from the scalp, which is integral to a claim that Stephen makes about how that drug works for hairloss.

I take it that nobody has seen any evidence for that claim?

Bryan

It starts to get a bit pathetic when you even try to deny information you posted "YOURSELF" Bryan :roll: :roll:

http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard.php ... 051&page=2

Quote:

"Treatment of normotensive or hypertensive humans or rats with arterial vasodilators such as hydralazine or minoxidil results in marked haemodynamic changes, which can be described as a 'hyperdynamic circulation'. Acutely, these changes are a consequence of vagal withdrawal, reflex-mediated increases in sympathetic activity and renin release and a shift of blood to the central blood volume."

A shift in blood towards the central blood volume, means a shift in fluid away from the surface tissues and hair follicles!

It's not my problem if you can't understand the implications of the references "you" post Bryan :wink:

S Foote.

 

[S Foote.]

For those who are interested in more up to date research, instead of the old stuff Bryan likes to quote here as "gospil", they should read this.

(PDF File)

http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/pr ... =92842.pdf

This in particular is telling of the questions "REAL" scientists are now asking about the old donor dominance notions, that "some" here still think are correct, inspite of ever increasing evidence to the contrary!

Note this study was over eight years, thats around "FOUR" times the period of the old studies Bryan wants us all to believe, quote:


"Evaluation of Hair Transplantation into
Various Recipient Sites: Lower Leg, Nape
of the Neck, Palm, Hand Dorsum, Lower
Back and Wrist
S.T. Hwang
Dr. Hwang’s Hair Clinic, Seoul, Korea


In 1998, scalp hairs were transplanted to the lower leg. Three years
later, some of the scalp hairs previously transplanted on the lower leg
were re-transplanted to the nape of the neck near the occipital scalp.
Hair transplantation to the palm, hand dorsum, lower back was done
in 2001. We reported different hair growth characteristics according
to the recipient site. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether
the transplanted hairs show different growth characteristics during
long-term follow-up. The survival rate, growth rate and hair diameter
were measured at the 8 years post surgery. The results showed:

(1) The survival rate and growth rate of the transplanted hairs is influenced
by the recipient site.
(2) The cycles of the transplanted hairs may change according to the
recipient area. rather than being fixed by the internal clock of hair
follicles.
(3) The hair growth rate may change immediately after transplantation
according to the recipient site and is maintained afterwards.
(4) The volume of transplanted hair follicles may not change regardless
of the recipient site.
(5) Skin thickness and/or blood vascularity play a role in hair growth and survival."

Open your eye's! :roll:

S Foote.

 

[michael barry]

Stephen,
I seen your post at hairsite (I post as Benji there, I dont like to carry feuds with Hairclub for Men or Transplant salesmen from forum to forum), and its very interesting.

Spanish dude posted this study which indicates that finasteride might not be effecting occipital follicles much at all (which is quite interesting)::::

This Korean study measured the effect of Finasteride over T and DHT levels:
-In vertex follicles
-In occipital follicles (back of the head)
-In serum


The DHT/T ratio was decreased in vertex follicles and serum, as expected.
but surprisingly, the DHT/T ratio was *not* altered in occipital follicles after taking Finasteride.

This means that these occipital follicles are not affected by baldness but they are not affected by Finasteride either.


I copy here the section of the pdf.:

Section N.10

<<<<<<<<<<<<
O10
Evaluation of Androgens and Cholesterol in
the Scalp Hair and Plasma of Patients with
Male-Pattern Baldness Before- and After-
Finasteride
W.-Y. Sim1, B.-L. Lew1, H.K. Ryu2, K.M. Kim2, B.C. Chung2
1Department of Dermatology, College of Medicine, Kyung
Hee University, 2Bioanalysis and Biotransformation Research
Center, KIST, Seoul, Korea

Finasteride, a competitive inhibitor of 5--reductase II enzyme, is
widely used as a medical treatment for patients with male-pattern
baldness (male pattern baldness), which is affected by the distribution of androgenic
steroids. To study the effect of finasteride, androgenic steroids and
cholesterol in the vertex and occipital scalp hair and in the plasma of
patients with male pattern baldness were quantified. The patients with male pattern baldness, aged
23–52 years, were treated with 1 mg daily of finasteride for 5 months.
The hair and plasma samples were hydrolyzed, extracted with n-pentane,
and derivatised with MSTFA:NH4I Telogen Effluvium (1000:4:5, v/w/w). We
analyzed the concentrations of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) and testosterone
(T) in the hair and plasma using gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry (GC-MS). In the case of the hair, the ratio of DHT/T
was decreased in the vertex scalp hair after the individual received the
finasteride dosage (p  0.005). However, we found no significant difference
in the ratio of DHT/T in the occipital scalp hair before and
after the individuals received the finasteride dosage. Like the results
in the vertex scalp hair, the ratio of DHT/T in the plasma was remarkably
decreased after finasteride dosage (p  0.001). Interestingly,
cholesterol was increased after finasteride in the hair of vertex and
occipital scalp (p  0.001). This study supports the effect of finasteride
in patients with male pattern baldness by the examination of decreased level of
DHT/T on scalp hair and in plasma.
<<<<<<<<<<



Alert | IP

 

[Bryan]

It starts to get a bit pathetic when you even try to deny information you posted "YOURSELF" Bryan :roll: :roll:

http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard.php ... 051&page=2

Quote:

"Treatment of normotensive or hypertensive humans or rats with arterial vasodilators such as hydralazine or minoxidil results in marked haemodynamic changes, which can be described as a 'hyperdynamic circulation'. Acutely, these changes are a consequence of vagal withdrawal, reflex-mediated increases in sympathetic activity and renin release and a shift of blood to the central blood volume."

A shift in blood towards the central blood volume, means a shift in fluid away from the surface tissues and hair follicles!

It's not my problem if you can't understand the implications of the references "you" post Bryan :wink:

Sorry, dude, but that's just your own personal SPIN that you put on that statement. Nowhere in there does it state specifically that minoxidil shifts fluid AWAY FROM THE SCALP. Get back to us when you can find some evidence that it really does do that. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath while you're searching desperately for that evidence! :wink:

Bryan

 

[wookster]

It starts to get a bit pathetic when you even try to deny information you posted "YOURSELF" Bryan :roll: :roll:

http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard.php ... 051&page=2

Quote:

"Treatment of normotensive or hypertensive humans or rats with arterial vasodilators such as hydralazine or minoxidil results in marked haemodynamic changes, which can be described as a 'hyperdynamic circulation'. Acutely, these changes are a consequence of vagal withdrawal, reflex-mediated increases in sympathetic activity and renin release and a shift of blood to the central blood volume."

A shift in blood towards the central blood volume, means a shift in fluid away from the surface tissues and hair follicles!

It's not my problem if you can't understand the implications of the references "you" post Bryan :wink:

Sorry, dude, but that's just your own personal SPIN that you put on that statement. Nowhere in there does it state specifically that minoxidil shifts fluid AWAY FROM THE SCALP. Get back to us when you can find some evidence that it really does do that. In the meantime, I'm not holding my breath while you're searching desperately for that evidence! :wink:

Bryan

The implication appears to be there though. It is more than a matter of semantics, yes. Shifting fluid to a "central volume" is a shifting away from the "outer" towards the "inner" :hairy: :hairy: :hairy:

Of course, putting minoxidil on the scalp grows more hair on the scalp AND the beard & body. How can the Foote hypothesis explain THAT

It must be the same mechanism at work shifting fluid away from the epidermis all over. Except for the puffy face???

:? :? :?

 

[Bryan]

The implication appears to be there though. It is more than a matter of semantics, yes. Shifting fluid to a "central volume" is a shifting away from the "outer" towards the "inner"

Kinda makes you wonder what "inner" and "outer" actually MEAN, in the context of the scalp. Since the scalp is so thin (relatively speaking), does that mean that fluid drains COMPLETELY from the entire scalp, and goes to the face?

Of course, putting minoxidil on the scalp grows more hair on the scalp AND the beard & body. How can the Foote hypothesis explain THAT

Oh, that's no problem for Stephen. He invents these ad hoc excuses to explain things like that: wherever you happen to find hair growing, his answer is simply that "minoxidil caused fluid to go away from that area", whether there's any evidence for it or not! :wink: Even if it's in an area with obvious edema (like a puffy face), that doesn't phase him for a second! He'll say, "The fluid went away from the hair follicles, and into the deeper skin". See what I mean? The guy has a convenient answer for EVERYTHING! :wink:

Bryan

 

[Guest]

Foote what about using topical magnesium for decreasing fluid pressure in the scalp?

 

[S Foote.]

Stephen,
I seen your post at hairsite (I post as Benji there, I dont like to carry feuds with Hairclub for Men or Transplant salesmen from forum to forum), and its very interesting.

Spanish dude posted this study which indicates that finasteride might not be effecting occipital follicles much at all (which is quite interesting)::::

This Korean study measured the effect of Finasteride over T and DHT levels:
-In vertex follicles
-In occipital follicles (back of the head)
-In serum


The DHT/T ratio was decreased in vertex follicles and serum, as expected.
but surprisingly, the DHT/T ratio was *not* altered in occipital follicles after taking Finasteride.

This means that these occipital follicles are not affected by baldness but they are not affected by Finasteride either.

The problem here is that we are back to a basic cause and effect question.

Of course there are going to be different reactions of all kinds within male pattern baldness follicles compared to non male pattern baldness follicles.

Once again the important testing has not been done in my opinion?

I see no reference to any testing in this study of "pre-male pattern baldness" follicles, to see if the reaction is also different to male pattern baldness "resistent" follicles?

The current theory is based upon "SOME" in-built difference within follicles that changes their growth rate when exposed to androgens.

I for one are still waiting for any genuine scientific evidence, for androgens "DIRECTLY" changing pre-male pattern baldness follicles into male pattern baldness follicle, as the current theory tries to claim??

S Foote.

 

[S Foote.]

The implication appears to be there though. It is more than a matter of semantics, yes. Shifting fluid to a "central volume" is a shifting away from the "outer" towards the "inner"

Kinda makes you wonder what "inner" and "outer" actually MEAN, in the context of the scalp. Since the scalp is so thin (relatively speaking), does that mean that fluid drains COMPLETELY from the entire scalp, and goes to the face?

I dont know where you get the nerve Bryan! :roll:

Apart from the info "YOU" posted on the effects of minoxidil on fluid movement, i have also posted other "real" scientific support for my argument!

The proof that edema can exist in layers of tissue whilst not effecting the outer layers, is in the reports on lipedematous scalp/alopecia.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract

http://alopecia.researchtoday.net/archive/1/2/66.htm

These are genuine histological examinations of the conditions in the tissue layers for God's sake, and still you would try to deny the implications! :roll:

Of course, putting minoxidil on the scalp grows more hair on the scalp AND the beard & body. How can the Foote hypothesis explain THAT

Oh, that's no problem for Stephen. He invents these ad hoc excuses to explain things like that: wherever you happen to find hair growing, his answer is simply that "minoxidil caused fluid to go away from that area", whether there's any evidence for it or not! :wink: Even if it's in an area with obvious edema (like a puffy face), that doesn't phase him for a second! He'll say, "The fluid went away from the hair follicles, and into the deeper skin". See what I mean? The guy has a convenient answer for EVERYTHING! :wink:

Bryan

An explaination backed by "REAL" science Bryan! I know you have difficulties understanding real science, but just for once, try to comprehend the studies on lipedematous scalp/alopecia i referenced :wink:

I always back up my arguments with genuine science, so why don't you try doing the same for a change Bryan?

Why don't you tell us all how you can justify your rant about donor dominance below, with the "up to date" eight year findings i posted above?

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/discussions ... hp?t=17571

Go on Bryan, explain that! 8)


S Foote.

 

[S Foote.]

Foote what about using topical magnesium for decreasing fluid pressure in the scalp?

I would suggest you study the posts on what people are using to treat the inflammation in male pattern baldness.

S Foote.

 

[michael barry]

Bryan,

No kidding man, this:

Evaluation of Hair Transplantation into
Various Recipient Sites: Lower Leg, Nape
of the Neck, Palm, Hand Dorsum, Lower
Back and Wrist
S.T. Hwang
Dr. Hwang’s Hair Clinic, Seoul, Korea


In 1998, scalp hairs were transplanted to the lower leg. Three years
later, some of the scalp hairs previously transplanted on the lower leg
were re-transplanted to the nape of the neck near the occipital scalp.
Hair transplantation to the palm, hand dorsum, lower back was done
in 2001. We reported different hair growth characteristics according
to the recipient site. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether
the transplanted hairs show different growth characteristics during
long-term follow-up. The survival rate, growth rate and hair diameter
were measured at the 8 years post surgery. The results showed:

(1) The survival rate and growth rate of the transplanted hairs is influenced
by the recipient site.
(2) The cycles of the transplanted hairs may change according to the
recipient area. rather than being fixed by the internal clock of hair
follicles.
(3) The hair growth rate may change immediately after transplantation
according to the recipient site and is maintained afterwards.
(4) The volume of transplanted hair follicles may not change regardless
of the recipient site.
(5) Skin thickness and/or blood vascularity play a role in hair growth and survival."

.............is interesting. The observation that after 8 years that the "volume of transplanted hair follicles may not change regardless of reicpient site" is notable for the transplantation business.

If they are referring to the circumference of the hairs, it would seem to indicate that people putting body hair on their scalps, hoping it will "get fat" as well as long (we know it can get long up there), will be dissapointed as time goes by and this doesn't happen. Survival rate, growth rate, and HAIR DIAMETER were measured. Growth phases take the characteristics of the recipient area. Neat stuff, and we know more for certain now because of these Korean Docs.

 

[Bryan]

The current theory is based upon "SOME" in-built difference within follicles that changes their growth rate when exposed to androgens.

I for one are still waiting for any genuine scientific evidence, for androgens "DIRECTLY" changing pre-male pattern baldness follicles into male pattern baldness follicle, as the current theory tries to claim??

Actually, I don't think the "current theory" makes that claim. I don't think anybody KNOWS what causes that change in hair follicles (assuming that they really do change, in the first place). MAYBE androgens cause them to slowly shift that way over a period of years, or MAYBE it is indeed a built-in genetic "clock" of some sort. You don't have any business trying to speak for what the current theory claims, because that hasn't been elucidated yet.

Bryan

 

[Bryan]

I dont know where you get the nerve Bryan! :roll:

Apart from the info "YOU" posted on the effects of minoxidil on fluid movement, i have also posted other "real" scientific support for my argument!

The proof that edema can exist in layers of tissue whilst not effecting the outer layers, is in the reports on lipedematous scalp/alopecia.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... t=Abstract

http://alopecia.researchtoday.net/archive/1/2/66.htm

These are genuine histological examinations of the conditions in the tissue layers for God's sake, and still you would try to deny the implications! :roll:

Is THAT the best you can do, Stephen? Dig up some information on a rare condition that occurs mainly in black women that involves a THICK, fatty scalp and has an unknown etiology, and try to make us all believe that it somehow supports your theory on how minoxidil stimulates hairgrowth? Sorry, but you've got to do a LOT better than that! :wink:

Despite your attempts at distraction, my previous question remains unanswered. There apparently is no evidence that minoxidil causes a shift of fluid away from the scalp.

Bryan

 

[Bryan]

Bryan,

No kidding man, this:

[...]

.............is interesting.

Yes, it IS quite interesting. It does seem that the recipient area can have _some_ influence on the growth and cycling of transplanted hair follicles. I've never really denied that possibility. However, the specific condition we call androgenetic alopecia is not influenced by it, according to all the evidence we've accumulated over the years and decades.

Bryan

 

[CCS]

Donor dominance falling apart? you mean my transplanted hair might die? Interesting how Brain and Foote claim each other's logic is wrong, but from what I can tell they both use similar logic, but come to different conclusions because they use different premises. For example, Bryan says that men with androgen insensitivity syndrome have think head hair and no body hair, yet Foote claims that these men have a variety of follicle sizes. He even quotes it like Bryan already knows this, and does not acknowledge the contradiction of assumptions.

You guys first need to agree on whether androgenic insensitive men have a variety of hair sizes or not, and maybe supply some sources. A matter of simple fact has got to be on the books by now.

I have to question Foote's sources when he says that exposing pre-balding or balding follicles to more androgens does not change their growth rate. If Finasteride changes the growth rate in 80% of men, certainly, does Finasteride's effect not come from reduced DHT levels? I'm just not seeing where this extra mechanism comes in, unless Foote explains the details of the experiments.

As for that other guy saying the scalp needs DHT, this got me worried because I just told 50+ people on this board to load their scalps with topical dutasteride, and they liked my advice. I hope we don't need DHT. Figuring out the optimal DHT level for each person would prove difficult. I just know that the 55% reduction of 0.5mg dutasteride corresponded 1.5x as much hair as Proscar, and the 82% DHT reduction of 2.5 mg/day dutasteride corresponded to twice the hair growth. They'd need more doses to see where the peak is at. If getting rid of all of it had the best effect, I'd have to side with Bryan.

 

[CCS]

OK, my reply was meant for the first page. I did not realize this debate went on for 54 pages.

 

[Guest]

I read somewhere that people deficient in the Type 2 isoenzyme of 5alpha-reductase do not develop Androgenetic Alopecia.

Can somebody tell first of all if this is correct, and if it is how this is explained in Foote's theory? Maybe it's already explained, but I got a headache reading those 54 pages!

 

[michael barry]

Music 23 wrote : "I read somewhere that people deficient in the Type 2 isoenzyme of 5alpha-reductase do not develop Androgenetic Alopecia. "


There are some Guatemalan men who were studied in the seventies that have a genetic deficiency of the alpha five reductase enzyme (the one that is in the root sheath of each and every hair follicle on your body---and a few other places like your liver). They never develop acne or baldness. They also dont develop noticeable male genitalia unitl after puberty. They live normal lives thereafter, but keep their hair.


Music 23, Ive read a few articles in which Doctors speculated that a very high amount of androgens during puberty might be what causes hair to become genetically liable to androgens in later life. These guys have testosterone, and they have type 1 alpha five DHT. Propecia stops about 90% of your type 2 alpha five reductase BHT from being made. It would seeminly theoretically to more-or-less completely stop further loss, but men see a slow recession on it after the first couple of years of higher hair counts. Dutasteride stops 98% of type 2 DHT.

Ive seen it bandied about by some that DHT is the initiator of male baldness, and over the years other hormones (test, andro, etc) can also play a role.............its anyones guess.

If you can tolerate propecia with no side effects..............I think its the best place to start formulating a regimine