Is it an urban myth ...

[wallace911]

... or reality that diffuse thinners are responding better to treatments than those with the classic pattern and if so why?

Would that mean as well that they have better chances to maintain than others in the long run ... or does your pattern of hair loss say nothing at all about what to expect in the future?

 

[Fundi]

A total guess, but I'd imagine.

a) A diffuser still has minatusied hair, rather than a bald spot. It's easier to thicken hair than regrow.

b) If it's kept short/buzzed, you may only need to thicken it slightly before your hairloss becomes almost unnoticable.

 

[wallace911]

I disagree, the hair is not only miniaturized ... you lose it like everybody else only over the whole head instead of in one place.

But you may have still given me the answer:

It's easier to treat an area (cosmetically) that still has hair than an area that has already lost all its hair ... you just need less to cover up ... so once on treatment a diffuser might seem to make better results than someone who is trying to scale down his bald spot or re-grow his temples ...

... meaning that in the end the whole process is the same end the diffusers are pretty much the fucked ones.

+++

Actually ... I just repeated you. You were right.

 

[Thickandthin]

I disagree, the hair is not only miniaturized ... you lose it like everybody else only over the whole head instead of in one place.

But you may have still given me the answer:

It's easier to treat an area (cosmetically) that still has hair than an area that has already lost all its hair ... you just need less to cover up ... so once on treatment a diffuser might seem to make better results than someone who is trying to scale down his bald spot or re-grow his temples ...

... meaning that in the end the whole process is the same end the diffusers are pretty much the f***ed ones.

+++

Actually ... I just repeated you. You were right.

bingo.

fact is, a lot of "receders" are diffuse as well - just not visibly yet. i'm pretty damn sure i have miniaturized hair all across the entire frontal 1/3rd of my scalp, although i currently only have temple recession. if my ultimate pattern is to be a NW4 or 5 (which it probably is), then I'd say it's not unreasonable to guess that I have early miniaturization across those areas. which leads me to believe that finasteride probably IS beneficial for me, in contrast to what i originally believed - but that's another story....

the quoted figure is that you only notice hair loss when 50% of it is gone. but with the hairline you don't have any warning at all really. it seems to vanish overnight because there's not a lot of hair there anyway. but yeah - once the hairline is gone it's very tough to bring it back, because the follicles are dead. but with diffuse thinning there's still a lot of life + a larger amount of hair for coverage, so its win win with treatments.

 

[wallace911]

Makes somehow sense ThickAndThin.

But what's the difference really between me and you then (me thinning everywhere on the whole top my head)? Do you think my follicles are generally more sensitive than yours or are they just more evenly sensitive? I mean if a diffuse thinner just had more sensitive follicles wouldn't the pattern then still be the same as yours only that everything just happened in a shorter period?

I'd probably say that diffuse thinners just have the same type of follicle on the whole top of their head while those guys with the classic pattern have follicles with different sensitivity.

Meaning that by the time you have a bald spot I have lost everything ...

... however whether that's true or not diffuse thinners are definitely not better responding than others. That's just a misconception.