- Reaction score
- 126
For people who are still in denial. I challenge you to find a man like that who is Norwood 1.
View attachment 149035
You only notice his wide galeas BECAUSE he's balding.
For people who are still in denial. I challenge you to find a man like that who is Norwood 1.
View attachment 149035
this is so nreliable and doesnt debunk anythingNah. I have the exact same face shape my father had. He died at 70 with a NW0-1 and I'm have f*****g DUPA at 22
this is so nreliable and doesnt debunk anything
No, you are trying to debunk a theory with some stupid anecdotal evidence. You dont even know what a big and expanded galea is, Expalin to me please, why are these men balding? because they inherited a balding gene?Why is this unreliable?
you are being stupid nowGalea is a roman helmet according to google, use 2 are just making up your own words now
No, you are trying to debunk a theory with some stupid anecdotal evidence. You dont even know what a big and expanded galea is, Expalin to me please, why are these men balding? because they inherited a balding gene?
yes you are correct hahahayou are being stupid now
i dont think its skull expansion. They likely had galeas like this when they were kids. dr phil also had a big galea as a kid. And nobody who has a galea like them two men can have norwood 1It's not anedoctal. I don't care if you believe it or not. I'm not trying to debunk it, it's just a personal experience. It's not a general rule, and I was answering his "verical face shape" question.
About the big head guys, well, I thought the scalp tension theory was debunked years ago. There's plenty bald guys with this head shape and plenty of full heads with this head shape. Still, we don't fully understand male pattern baldness so, It might be possible. But I'm pretty sure they carry the genes.
Again, what can cause vision problems?
Blood sugar issues, insulin resistance, diabetes, which also are implicated in hair loss.
Vague mythology is for lame shits.
Yep. My mother is growing a tiny bald spot in her crown, clearly a diffuse thinning too, but very very subtle. We're actually balding at same time and pattern. How lovely.If you still believe that women don't bald. Here is a woman who is thinning at the crown.
View attachment 149414
This woman is thinning at the front too.
And a woman with receding hairline.
View attachment 149415
This woman is also thinning at the crown a bit and has a bad galea.
Women don't bald as aggressively as men because of their much lower androgen concentration and DHT production.
But thinning and receding in older women is very common and at least 50% of women over 60 have it.
I gotta say this is the stupidest thing I've ever read. Endogenous GH is fine unless you get to acromegaly levels of it. Exogenous GH is dangerous. Low GH has been also implicated in diabetes. There's no direct causation to this and is basically broscience just like the statement you are trying to detract.I can answer your question very easily, and it has absolutely nothing to do with phrenology outside of the fact that what you describe as an expanded "galea" which I cannot find any clinical definition for, is the result of high levels of growth hormone.
When you extrapolate that against the fact that those people might possibly have persistently high levels of growth hormone throughout their lives, and the fact that growth hormone in excess leads to insulin resistance and diabetes, you start to see a pattern. Mitigate the excess of growth hormone, mitigate the hair loss, high GH itself can cause hair loss but also by means of inducing insulin resistance.
It's not the shape of the head, it's the hormonal profile which developmentally may have been the cause of it, at least have a solid understanding of why craniofacial development occurs and its relationship to hormones and what effects those hormones actually have.
I experienced significant, in fact a scary amount of embarrassing hair loss that I recovered from in my 20s and my forehead/crown is not wide and extremely horizontal and my hair recovered amazingly and I had returned to a dense mop on my head for most of my 30s.
Phrenology/physiognomy is the religion of people either too lazy or not intelligent enough to discern the root causes of physical traits and instead try to correlate things based on their own arbitrary mythology instead of looking at what biologically causes what.
Frankly you sound like that nutjob from 8chan pol from three years ago that tried saying that people who didn't have detached earlobes was a sign of pedophilia, what you're describing if you knew what you were talking about is about as insane.
I gotta say this is the stupidest thing I've ever read. Endogenous GH is fine unless you get to acromegaly levels of it. Exogenous GH is dangerous. Low GH has been also implicated in diabetes. There's no direct causation to this and is basically broscience just like the statement you are trying to detract.
To give you an example of a bald person with super high GH, take Michael Jordan. Tallest in his family by an average of 8 inches. Eagle vision. Bald head. There are so many people like him out there. Guy's not diabetic in any way.