Is there an absolute cure for baldness if you don't care???

[CCS]

I also read that while castrated males don't go bald, castration does not cure balding males.

i also read that the testes are not the only organs that make testosterone. Some glands in the body do to, which is why castration might not be enough for some men.

 

[CCS]

I also read a post by a guy complaining about his shiny scalp. he said whether he washes it or not, it still is very shiny, and that it is noticable even no matter what length he has his hair that is on it.

This shows that follicles are not dead just because the scalp is shiny. This guy had some full length hairs on his.

While it is possible some hairs are just to short to poke through the surface, I've heard statements that some follicles are completely sleeping and can be woken up. Yes, scaring does kill them, but I don't think scaring happens right away or completely at first, even if the follicle is producing no hair and the scalp is shiny.

Loreal, the makers of amenixil say that scaring occurs while the hair is still growing, and it just gradually reduces the maximum width and depth of the hair. I don't know if that is true.

There also were posts by people who said amemixil does nothing, but I don't know if these people used it by itself or how long they used it or what they were expecting. It should be kind of like minoxidil, although better at stopping scaring and maybe worse at adding the 30% volume up front.

 

[HARM1]

From what you wrote, is it right to understand that:
kiilin the imune system in a bald man would bring back all of his hairs?

 

[CCS]

I don't know if it would bring them all back, but it would bring back a large majority of the minaturized ones and maybe a decent amount in smooth scalp. I did not read any numbers on this. i just read that killing the immune system would regrow a lot more hair than any other treatment, and I've read many "studies" where smooth scalp is grafted on to nude mice with no immune system and hair quickly grows out of the scalp, although the researchers say the drug they were testing did it. I've heard the immune theory from multiple sources besides dr proctor.

 

[HARM1]

I don't know if it would bring them all back, but it would bring back a large majority of the minaturized ones and maybe a decent amount in smooth scalp. I did not read any numbers on this. i just read that killing the immune system would regrow a lot more hair than any other treatment, and I've read many "studies" where smooth scalp is grafted on to nude mice with no immune system and hair quickly grows out of the scalp, although the researchers say the drug they were testing did it. I've heard the immune theory from multiple sources besides dr proctor.

If what you say i correct, then a man can enter into a place that will keep him away from patogens, and keep watch on him, lower his imune system and give him DHT alockers, and that will bring back his hair. Are yousaying that imune system just keeps attackin the folicle because of DHT signaling it to, and but the falicle is never killed, only supreesed? if that were true, we coudl restore all of a man's hair by the way i described. altough lowering the imune sysem is dangoures, let me remind you that you have people with non self orgens that live with imune supressers for all their life.

 

[CCS]

the immune system does eventually kill the follicle. It just takes time. Often years after the scalp is smooth bald. The presents of sebum making the skin shiny has little to do with it. Men with male pattern baldness have more sebum on average than men without male pattern baldness, and this trend increases the longer they have male pattern baldness, but many such men never have excessive sebum, and many men without male pattern baldness do.

The immunes system continues to attack hairs even after all DHT is removed. That is why Dr Proctor recommends treatments other than anti-androgens. It is like it has a memory. Sepressing someone's immune system in a very steril place and watching them for illnesses would regrow a lot of hair. Maybe all the hairs that are not dead yet. The material I read did not specify how much, but only that it would regrow a lot more than any other treatment. The only problem with your idea is I'm sure scientists try to raise nude mice in a steril environment, but they die in an average of 2 months from sickness and no immune system to fight it. Maybe scientists are not that careful, because it costs too much for a replaceable mouse, and only would prolong the their life if a longer experiment was needed. Either way, this shows us that hair grows from smooth scalp in less than 2 months.

 

[holyhair]

is their no way to fool the immune system that the hair is not hair?
thus no attack?

 

[Solo]

Either way, this shows us that hair grows from smooth scalp in less than 2 months

In a mouse. If someone could give me a penny for every remedy for hair loss in a mouse I´ve read about in those two years I´ve spent in the forums I´d be riding my yatch to hawaii right now.

 

[CCS]

yes, but it is human hair grown in a mouse, and not just mouse hair grown in a mouse, and it is still embedded in human scalp. there are also drugs that grow hair on balding monkeys. I think those ones are even less reliable.

 

[HARM1]

CCS I DO NOT think the imune system keeps attacking a folicle even when all the DHT is gone. When you cut someone's balls of, falciles stop dying, thus the imune system stops attackin. And also if that were true, DHT inhibition would not be of any help, since the imune system as you say has a memory of the falicle, but we all know it does help.


We need to check people with imune supreserss and see what has happend to their hair. If they live with a low imune system , then so can I for a few month's thus taking back the clock and regrowing the hair that has not died yet. in a cople phases we could regrow tons of hair if this is true. What needs to be checked, is which of the imune system's arms is lowerd, and check which one is the one that kills the falicle. that way we could lower only that arm of our emune system that kills the falicles.

 

[CCS]

Emerging Model for Pattern Balding (after Kligman, others )
Balding begins when male sex hormones do "something " to the scalp hair follicle which causes it to be read as a "foreign body". Your immune system then mounts an attack on the hair folllicle. The main damage in pattern hair loss is probably immunologically-mediated. Damage to lining of blood vessels, which produces hair growth factors, makes the balding process worse.



Hormonal factors:
Castration, lack of DHT-receptors/enzymes (testicular feminization) , feminine status block the progression of balding and hair loss. However, women and castrated males have other sources of androgens and can still experience pattern loss.


Immunological factors:
Microscopically, balding looks like organ rejection. That is, increased number of immune system cells clustor round the base of the scalp hair follicle. Interestingly, lessor numbers of immune system cells normally cluster around the hair follicle. These may have a role in the normal hair cycle.



Organ rejection drugs ( e.g., cyclosporin ) reverse balding better than antiandrogens. This gives a rough indication of the relative importance of hormonal verses immunological factors in maintaining the balding state. Conversely, cyclosporin and similar agents may also have a "phenytoin-like" action on follicles which induces hair regrowth, separate from their immunosuppressive properties.
Antibodies to hair follicles are also present in blood in some cases of pattern hair loss.

Blood Vessel Lining in Pattern Hair Loss


Antiandrogens: E.g.: Propecia (Finasteride), Cyoctal, spironolactone.

These agents have significant hair regrowth properties.. They are also useful as adjuvants to other hair loss treatment where they 1) make it work better 2) Help prevent tolerance. Every few years, a new antiandrogen will be presented as the ultimate "solution for balding". This has yet to work out. E.g., clinical trials with cyoctal, arguably the most potent topical antiandrogen, were terminated because of lack of effectiveness. Even castration, the commonly used treatment for prostate cancer, generally doesn't do a lot for balding and hair loss.
Arguably, the most promising new antiandrogen is Propecia ( finasteride), from Merck. For more on this agent, go to propecia.com. Tho the weakest antiandrogen on paper, it seems to be as effective as the others in baldness treatment. My experience is that oral finasteride works about as well as topical spironolactone, about a 50% response rate, at one year. Some individuals take even longer to respond.

BTW, I have prime patents in this area ( for growth stimulators plus antiandrogens ). In fact, because of the publication of our patents, the combination of a hair growth stimulator plus and antiandrogen is now " obvious " and thus unpatentable. I sure wish antiandrogens worked better.

Possible explaination: Male hormones only initiate balding. Further, whatever hormones do seems to be mostly irreversible. The main damage to the hair follicle seems to be done by other factors, especially immunological. But I reserve the right to change my mind about this.

http://www.drproctor.com/baldfaq1.htm

 

[HARM1]

Emerging Model for Pattern Balding (after Kligman, others )
Balding begins when male sex hormones do "something " to the scalp hair follicle which causes it to be read as a "foreign body". Your immune system then mounts an attack on the hair folllicle. The main damage in pattern hair loss is probably immunologically-mediated. Damage to lining of blood vessels, which produces hair growth factors, makes the balding process worse.



Hormonal factors:
Castration, lack of DHT-receptors/enzymes (testicular feminization) , feminine status block the progression of balding and hair loss. However, women and castrated males have other sources of androgens and can still experience pattern loss.


Immunological factors:
Microscopically, balding looks like organ rejection. That is, increased number of immune system cells clustor round the base of the scalp hair follicle. Interestingly, lessor numbers of immune system cells normally cluster around the hair follicle. These may have a role in the normal hair cycle.



Organ rejection drugs ( e.g., cyclosporin ) reverse balding better than antiandrogens. This gives a rough indication of the relative importance of hormonal verses immunological factors in maintaining the balding state. Conversely, cyclosporin and similar agents may also have a "phenytoin-like" action on follicles which induces hair regrowth, separate from their immunosuppressive properties.
Antibodies to hair follicles are also present in blood in some cases of pattern hair loss.

Blood Vessel Lining in Pattern Hair Loss


Antiandrogens: E.g.: Propecia (Finasteride), Cyoctal, spironolactone.

These agents have significant hair regrowth properties.. They are also useful as adjuvants to other hair loss treatment where they 1) make it work better 2) Help prevent tolerance. Every few years, a new antiandrogen will be presented as the ultimate "solution for balding". This has yet to work out. E.g., clinical trials with cyoctal, arguably the most potent topical antiandrogen, were terminated because of lack of effectiveness. Even castration, the commonly used treatment for prostate cancer, generally doesn't do a lot for balding and hair loss.
Arguably, the most promising new antiandrogen is Propecia ( finasteride), from Merck. For more on this agent, go to propecia.com. Tho the weakest antiandrogen on paper, it seems to be as effective as the others in baldness treatment. My experience is that oral finasteride works about as well as topical spironolactone, about a 50% response rate, at one year. Some individuals take even longer to respond.

BTW, I have prime patents in this area ( for growth stimulators plus antiandrogens ). In fact, because of the publication of our patents, the combination of a hair growth stimulator plus and antiandrogen is now " obvious " and thus unpatentable. I sure wish antiandrogens worked better.

Possible explaination: Male hormones only initiate balding. Further, whatever hormones do seems to be mostly irreversible. The main damage to the hair follicle seems to be done by other factors, especially immunological. But I reserve the right to change my mind about this.

http://www.drproctor.com/baldfaq1.htm

Hi friend , could you adress my comment, point by point?

 

[Guest]

My experience is that oral finasteride works about as well as topical spironolactone, about a 50% response rate, at one year. Some individuals take even longer to respond.

Why does Dr Proctor say this? I thought the response rate is much higher than 50%? Maybe this info from him i sold.

 

[Guest]

To the original poster,

hair multiplication seems like it will be a revolutionary treatment, and while it won't cure baldness, it may render it irrelevant, due to the unlimited amount of donor hair.

 

[CCS]

Harm1,

If you want me to address your comment, point by point, it would make more sense for you to quote your comment, not mine, or perhaps both. I thought I respond to your comment.

"CCS I DO NOT think the imune system keeps attacking a folicle even when all the DHT is gone. When you cut someone's balls of, falciles stop dying, thus the imune system stops attackin."

Bryan would quote Hamilton and agree, but as I pointed out already, scientists have been wrong before due to small sample size, and saying is true for everyone is speculation, and I've read other sources that say castration does not always stop the balding process once it has started. The testes are not the only organ that produces testosterone.

"And also if that were true, DHT inhibition would not be of any help, since the imune system as you say has a memory of the falicle, but we all know it does help."

It would not be a contradiction for DHT inhibitiors to slow down the process, though you make a good point about the attack drastically stopping. That point is very worth talking about more, and possibly contradicts the statement that castration would not all but stop hairloss. However, this runs into a different point:

"We need to check people with imune supreserss and see what has happend to their hair."

This has already been looked into. They regrow more hair than men taking DHT suppressors.

"If they live with a low imune system , then so can I for a few month's thus taking back the clock and regrowing the hair that has not died yet. in a cople phases we could regrow tons of hair if this is true. What needs to be checked, is which of the imune system's arms is lowerd, and check which one is the one that kills the falicle. that way we could lower only that arm of our emune system that kills the falicles."

Immune depressants being stronger than DHT inhibitors does not mean they would regrow tons of hair. Rogaine regrows more hair than propecia, and the two in combination are not giving men their hair back even though they may use it for years on end. The exact magnitude of the immune system's hairloss effects have not been measured deliborately, but we just know they are greater than the difference between full DHT levels and 30% DHT levels. Perhaps an explaination is that 0% androgen levels would be better than immune suppression. I though DHT had 30 times the potency of testosterone, but now Bryan is saying testosterone has more androgen affinity than spironolactone, which is given a number of 67 compared to DHT's 100, whatever that means. Perhaps testosterone has a strong affinity, but not much effect once bonded. Either way, 5ar inhibitors don't inhibit testosterone, whereas castration does.

Has anyone else besides me heard that the testes are not the only organs that produce testosterone?

I'm going to try to find information on castration and hair loss experiments, and make sure I have my facts straight.

 

[CCS]

I'd like to know how many balding men Hamilton castrated, and how long he followed them, and how long they were balding before they were castrated. Just looking at Unics does not count. Lets not do a 6 month propecia study with two people with mild hair loss, now. And lets not look at small sample sizes either, since acne escaped some researcher who thought 5ar2 deficient people don't get acne.

I want to find Hamilton's research and post the methods here. And I'm going to find other castration research.

I would love it if stopping androgens would stop balding. We can do that.

 

[Bryan]

"CCS I DO NOT think the imune system keeps attacking a folicle even when all the DHT is gone. When you cut someone's balls of, falciles stop dying, thus the imune system stops attackin."

Bryan would quote Hamilton and agree, but as I pointed out already, scientists have been wrong before due to small sample size, and saying is true for everyone is speculation, and I've read other sources that say castration does not always stop the balding process once it has started.

I don't necessarily take what Hamilton said at full face value, either, but at the very least I think it's safe to say that castration is a POWERFUL force against balding.

The testes are not the only organ that produces testosterone.

True, but castration does cause a dramatic 90%-95% reduction in testosterone production.

"We need to check people with imune supreserss and see what has happend to their hair."

This has already been looked into. They regrow more hair than men taking DHT suppressors.

I remain rather skeptical of that claim, even though I know that's what Dr. Proctor said. I've previously posted a case history of a fellow who was taking large amounts of cyclosporin, but it had no apparent effect at all on his balding.

I though DHT had 30 times the potency of testosterone, but now Bryan is saying testosterone has more androgen affinity than spironolactone, which is given a number of 67 compared to DHT's 100, whatever that means.

I don't believe I ever said that. What I _did_ say recently is that RU58841 is generally considered to have about the same Relative Binding Affinity for the androgen receptor as testosterone.

Has anyone else besides me heard that the testes are not the only organs that produce testosterone?

Sure. Testosterone is produced by the adrenals, too, but castration still SHARPLY reduces serum testosterone.

I'm going to try to find information on castration and hair loss experiments, and make sure I have my facts straight.

I'll post Hamilton's 1960 study on castration and hairloss. I'll do that tomorrow. Gotta go do something else shortly!

Bryan

 

[CCS]

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/discussions ... hp?t=28383