If there is an external treatment to shut down the androgen receptors on the scalp, will it be better than CRISPR/gene editing as a permanent cure?

[SaveTheMane]

So a lot of people thinks that CRISPR/gene editing will be the most effective solutions to cure male pattern baldness permanently as it can literally change the genetics for you and your children once for all, but what if there are ways to shut down the androgen receptors or decreasing their numbers/sensitivity on your scalp with EXTERNAL treatment that is only done on your skin and won't affect your genes? Will that be a better fix than gene editing? Consider it like our wisdom teeth, we are now removing them through surgeries, as the result our body will eventually evolve its way out of wisdom teeth entirely because we keep cutting them off from us. If we can do the same for androgen receptors, shutting down/removing the scalp androgen receptors through surgeries, then the body will start to respond that ARs on the scalp are useless, and slowly minimizing them, one day we will no longer have any ARs left on our scalp, thus male pattern baldness will be cured naturally without messing with our genetics.

 

[JaneyElizabeth]

So a lot of people thinks that CRISPR/gene editing will be the most effective solutions to cure male pattern baldness permanently as it can literally change the genetics for you and your children once for all, but what if there are ways to shut down the androgen receptors or decreasing their numbers/sensitivity on your scalp with EXTERNAL treatment that is only done on your skin and won't affect your genes? Will that be a better fix than gene editing? Consider it like our wisdom teeth, we are now removing them through surgeries, as the result our body will eventually evolve its way out of wisdom teeth entirely because we keep cutting them off from us. If we can do the same for androgen receptors, shutting down/removing the scalp androgen receptors through surgeries, then the body will start to respond that ARs on the scalp are useless, and slowly minimizing them, one day we will no longer have any ARs left on our scalp, thus male pattern baldness will be cured naturally without messing with our genetics.

Isn't this theoretical regarding gene editing? My understanding is that the baldness gene is too complicated with too many permutations for this to be feasible.

Janey

 

[stressftw]

CRISPR or any kind of gene editing isnt suppose to "mess" with your genes, but to fix it
More pratical solutions for hair loss, the better. Majority of people would go for the cheapest solution if there was more than one avaiable.
Sincerely speaking.. Having a long-term potential cure for male pattern baldness with no sides is utopic enough for me to even start to confabulate in problematize between TWO cures when we have literally nothing in a near perspective that can deliver something that comes even close to what you just mentioned

 

[Chads don't bald]

So a lot of people thinks that CRISPR/gene editing will be the most effective solutions to cure male pattern baldness permanently as it can literally change the genetics for you and your children once for all, but what if there are ways to shut down the androgen receptors or decreasing their numbers/sensitivity on your scalp with EXTERNAL treatment that is only done on your skin and won't affect your genes? Will that be a better fix than gene editing? Consider it like our wisdom teeth, we are now removing them through surgeries, as the result our body will eventually evolve its way out of wisdom teeth entirely because we keep cutting them off from us. If we can do the same for androgen receptors, shutting down/removing the scalp androgen receptors through surgeries, then the body will start to respond that ARs on the scalp are useless, and slowly minimizing them, one day we will no longer have any ARs left on our scalp, thus male pattern baldness will be cured naturally without messing with our genetics.

Evolution doesn't really work like that.

The only way baldness will be cured evolutionarily like you're saying is if men with the baldness genes stop reproducing. Otherwise any AR degrader won't do anything because men with the baldness genes would still reproduce and their kids would also receive such genes and go bald themselves.

Just because you change phenotype using drugs doesn't mean you are changing genotype. The reason many mouths don't have wisdom teeth today have nothing to go with the fact that we extract them, but because people with mutations that suppress the formation of wisdom teeth have no problem reproducing, so these genes remain in the gene pool.

 

[JaneyElizabeth]

Lamarckism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[trialAcc]

Evolution doesn't really work like that.

The only way baldness will be cured evolutionarily like you're saying is if men with the baldness genes stop reproducing. Otherwise any AR degrader won't do anything because men with the baldness genes would still reproduce and their kids would also receive such genes and go bald themselves.

Just because you change phenotype using drugs doesn't mean you are changing genotype. The reason many mouths don't have wisdom teeth today have nothing to go with the fact that we extract them, but because people with mutations that suppress the formation of wisdom teeth have no problem reproducing, so these genes remain in the gene pool.

It's literally impossible to cure baldness evolutionarily. Most people who get hairloss have it after the age of when they traditionally have children, then you also have the fact that women carry the gene as well and might never display any signs of female hairloss. On top of all this, it's a recessive gene that can skip one or multiple generations.

 

[pegasus2]

Isn't this theoretical regarding gene editing? My understanding is that the baldness gene is too complicated with too many permutations for this to be feasible.

Janey

Baldness is polygenic indeed, but there is a single gene that is required for male pattern baldness which can be silenced. Without activation of the androgen receptor it can't happen. This won't reverse hair loss, but it will 100% prevent it.

 

[SaveTheMane]

The reason many mouths don't have wisdom teeth today have nothing to go with the fact that we extract them, but because people with mutations that suppress the formation of wisdom teeth have no problem reproducing, so these genes remain in the gene pool.

Then how did they get mutations of no wisdom teeth in the first place? Isn't that because their body is smart enough to recognize it as a useless thing?

 

[pegasus2]

Then how did they get mutations of no wisdom teeth in the first place? Isn't that because their body is smart enough to recognize it as a useless thing?

Evolution doesn't work like that. Mutations are random

 

[SaveTheMane]

It's literally impossible to cure baldness evolutionarily. Most people who get hairloss have it after the age of when they traditionally have children, then you also have the fact that women carry the gene as well and might never display any signs of female hairloss. On top of all this, it's a recessive gene that can skip one or multiple generations.

It is not impossible, but first people need to figure out what are the genes related to male pattern baldness, then they can do it in Nazi's way by analyzing if people have balding genes in their body or not and kill them all if they do. However, male pattern baldness itself is a mutation trait, everybody were full-heads back then before this mutation occurs. So after all baldies died, there is no guaranteed if similar mutations will not happen again to bring back male pattern baldness.

 

[SaveTheMane]

Evolution doesn't work like that. Mutations are random

Evolution and mutation is not the same. Mutation can happen randomly, creating features that can be useful, harmful, or even totally meaningless, and can have nothing to do with environmental or physical condition. But evolution is directly linked to a specie's behaviors and environmental conditions.

 

[trialAcc]

It is not impossible, but first people need to figure out what are the genes related to male pattern baldness, then they can do it in Nazi's way by analyzing if people have balding genes in their body or not and kill them all if they do. However, male pattern baldness itself is a mutation trait, everybody were full-heads back then before this mutation occurs. So after all baldies died, there is no guaranteed if similar mutations will not happen again to bring back male pattern baldness.

No, it's just impossible and stupid.

 

[SaveTheMane]

Isn't this theoretical regarding gene editing? My understanding is that the baldness gene is too complicated with too many permutations for this to be feasible.

Janey

My point is to shut down the ARs on scalp with surgeries or topical treatments, which is only on the skin, that you don't need to do anything with your gene. male pattern baldness can't be progress if there are no ARs on the skin.

 

[pegasus2]

Evolution and mutation is not the same. Mutation can happen randomly, creating features that can be useful, harmful, or even totally meaningless, and can have nothing to do with environmental or physical condition. But evolution is directly linked to a specie's behaviors and environmental conditions.

No kidding sherlock. The point is evolution happens due to random mutations being selected for or against. The fact that hey happen in the first place isn't due to your body being smart enough to make a mutation happen which is what you implied.

 

[JaneyElizabeth]

So you are saying that a male lion's mane started as a result of random mutation, instead of an evolution result that they fight each other and compete with other males more than the other cats? Same for a buck's antler, and a peacock's tail.

To my knowledge, only African male lions have manes. I think India still has wild lions and Europe did for a very long time. Since you mention it, all of those examples might be directly akin to male pattern baldness as a secondary sexual characteristic serving to differentiate XX's from XY's.

Best,
Janey

 

[Armando Jose]

IMHO common alopecia is not a genetic trait but a cultural issue.
BTW if there are no ARs on the skin, no hair.

 

[Chads don't bald]

It's literally impossible to cure baldness evolutionarily.

It's possible to do it artificially though, if you only bred people who didn't have any baldness related genes.

Not realistic but theoretically possible.

 

[MeDK]

It's possible to do it artificially though, if you only bred people who didn't have any baldness related genes.

Not realistic but theoretically possible.

Sure you can force human into a certain direction, just like when we breed other animals, humans aren't different in that way. We are all animals. So why not breed people with only good hair.

But for now we have to settle with autologous and allogenic transplants as the "lastest of the greatest".

 

[Armando Jose]

Where is there evidence of this?

ARKO (Androgen Receptor Knockout) mice have better hair than wildtype.

Dihydrotestosterone inhibits murine hair growth via the androgen receptor - PubMed

Androgens inhibit hair growth in mice, and this inhibition might be caused by androgen-androgen receptor signals.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Complete Androgen Insensivity Syndrome CAIS is more or less a chimera

Complete androgen insensitivity due to deletion of exon C of the androgen receptor gene highlights the functional importance of the second zinc finger of the androgen receptor in vivo - PubMed

Androgen-dependent gene transcription is mediated by the androgen receptor (AR) through interaction of its central zinc finger region with specific DNA sequences on target genes. Failure of this receptor-mediated gene transcription results in end organ resistance to androgens-the androgen...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[pegasus2]

How does this support your original statement? it doesn't note that they have altered scalp hair patterns or any hair loss. The only thing it notes relating to hair is that one female subject didn't grow pubic hair.

Biggest self-own I've seen in a while.