More PICTURES that prove Armando's theory is WRONG

[michael barry]

http://www.drvogelplasticsurgeon.com/hair transplant ... corrective


There are five or six pictures of men with old bad hair plugs there, the plugs stay in while the hair around them falls out. In some cases the pitifully so. Hair worn both short and long, combed forward and back.


http://www.drvogelplasticsurgeon.com/bna/hair_32.html
I think that one is particularily instructive.


Or how about this one: http://www.drvogelplasticsurgeon.com/bna/hair_08.html






SO how about it Armando, why doesnt sebum back up kill all those plugs that have been cut so short for so long? Any ideas?

 

[Hans Gruber]

why are you so angry?

 

[michael barry]

Im not angry, but I have a low tolerance for bullshitt.

 

[Bryan]

Im not angry, but I have a low tolerance for bullshitt.

That makes two of us! :wink:

 

[barcafan]

....must....crush....armando.......

 

[Armando Jose]

Dear friends;

My theory is not bullshit.

Bullshit is give the back at normal problems with sebum with the most of affected people of common hair loss.

Sebaceosu gland is vital for a healthy hair.

And, respect photos, the lenght of trasplanted hairs clearly are not very short or buzzed.

Have a nice day

Armando

 

[powersam]

i really appreciate the work of the surgeons who fix these poor plug jobs honestly. they take a freakshow and turn it into something totally cosmetically acceptable.

 

[Bryan]

Sebaceosu gland is vital for a healthy hair.

You keep saying that, Armando, so I'll keep pointing out that you have not so much as a shred, not an iota of evidence for that claim.

 

[Armando Jose]

Yes, I am obstinate.

But, my friend Bryan, you are not looking at the good angle.

Evidence: Sebaceous gland form part and it is a important and vital issue for pilosebaceous unit and hair follicle. Did you see a biopsy of them?

Armando

 

[recboi]

i really appreciate the work of the surgeons who fix these poor plug jobs honestly. they take a freakshow and turn it into something totally cosmetically acceptable.

I would be 10x worse than Taugenichts now had I not had my plugs repaired, though even now, if you know what to look for you can still spot them, and my entire donor supply is gone, covering only a tiny part of my head. I just have to pray I don't lose the rest of my hair for the rest of my life, and I'm only in my early 30s..

I think I started having my repair work done in 2001, and I had the pluggy look going on all throughout my 20s, so while most people that age were out having fun, getting laid, I didn't even have my first date until I was 27, and all my repair procedures had been completed....

Sure, maybe I overreacted, but honestly, do you think any girl in her mid 20s would go out with a mid 20s guy with obvious plugs?

 

[docj077]

Yes, I am obstinate.

But, my friend Bryan, you are not looking at the good angle.

Evidence: Sebaceous gland form part and it is a important and vital issue for pilosebaceous unit and hair follicle. Did you see a biopsy of them?

Armando

The sebaceous gland is absolutely required for the formation of the pilosebaceous unit as it is involved in the signaling processes that allow for the differentiation of the unit, but sebum production is not required for hair growth.

 

[Armando Jose]

Well, Doctor, you say the same but in others words.

Sebaceous gland is necesary to make the differentiation of the unit. Natural hair cycle require cycling differentiation of pilosebaceous unit.

Your second point: "sebum is not required for hair growth" is in debate. ¿have you any reference? In my opinion, childrens even before puberty, possibly, have androgens in the vicinity of scalp hair.

Armando

 

[michael barry]

[
The sebaceous gland is absolutely required for the formation of the pilosebaceous unit as it is involved in the signaling processes that allow for the differentiation of the unit, but sebum production is not required for hair growth.[/quote]




...........................absolutely Doctor. People with androgen insensitivity produce no measureable forehead sebum. THere are more openings for hair on the forehead per square cm than anywhere else on the body, including the scalp. Ive posted studies for Armando that confirm this. He just ignores them, and will answer your assertions with ridiculous questions like "whats the genetic difference between healthy hairs up front and donor area hairs"? etc.

Hairs up front have more androgen receptors, and their alpha five reductase enyzme is more active. Period. Thats it.


We have seen transplants that move ONE follicle (they do it all the time now, as the hairlines are built with one-follicle units and minigrafts for the first fourth of an inch in depth). The follicles will grow there and stay for the rest of a guys life until he is really old----------------then some may be lost due to age-thinning as people's hippocratic wreaths do indeed thin in old old age.

One of the plug pictures showed a man who had very short hair buzzed. All plugs. They had been there since the eighties. Still growin' strong. Finas has nothing to do with sebum, yet stops hairloss in many men. MK386 lowers sebum, yet hardly helps hairloss at all.


Yet Armando is back, over and over again...................misleading men into thinking growing their hair long will help them keep it. What is so pathetic is that men who THINK they might lose there hair might be able to get on things life finas or spironolactone and never lose it in the first damn place as the androgenic stimulation might never get high enough to get their DNA to "flip" the hair's response to male hormone.


To be honest, if this site was moderated as tensley as HLH, Armando would have been challenged by Farrel, and then kicked off in all probability. If you cant tell, I think men have the RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH about hair so they can save it, avoid transplantation and wigs (especially transplants in their twenties), and make the best decision up there for themselves. Yet forums are still full of hucksters, neo-luddite-anti-shampooist, and other nutjobs. Newbies get fascinated with such bullshit and blow two or three years when they could have been saving their hair. I seemingly have just stopped furhter loss. I needed a couple of extra things to halt it (nizoral, prox-n), but pretty much seem to be keeping it where it is for the past few years now. Treatments DO work, they wont regrow a ton, but can help you keep what you have.



I also make mention for Stephen something that Cole has written many times............................Cole likes to use nape of the neck hair in transplants for hairlines because they are smaller in diameter. Cole uses (or used to use) the same sized tool to make recipeint sites (alot of posters bithced about this because a smaller needle or razor slit is needed to make a recip site for a one or two hair follicular unit vs. a five hair one----leading to some white scarring around the smaller plugs). According to Stephen's theory, the tissue scaffold around these one hair plugs should allow for the nape hair to get very thick and large--------but they dont and remain finer thinner hairs that more accurately recreate a normal hairline because hairline hairs are almost always of smaller diameter than the hairs back behind them. Hence why Cole uses them (and some other FUE docs do this too-----pick nape hairs for hailine work).



For Doctor, Im going to post a discovery about "junk DNA" that really might interest you man.

 

[Bryan]

MK386 lowers sebum, yet hardly helps hairloss at all.

Michael, I've seen you post similar statements in the past, and I've been meaning to point out for quite a while that there aren't actually any studies that measured sebum production while taking MK386. At least I've never seen or heard of any, and I have just about every MK386 study.

It's still puzzling to me why MK386 didn't seem to halp acne in that trial from a year or two ago. Unfortuanately, they didn't bother to measure sebum in that one, either.

I'm not saying that it _doesn't_ reduce sebum, just that it's never really been tested and verified for that, as far as I know.

 

[docj077]

[
The sebaceous gland is absolutely required for the formation of the pilosebaceous unit as it is involved in the signaling processes that allow for the differentiation of the unit, but sebum production is not required for hair growth.

...........................absolutely Doctor. People with androgen insensitivity produce no measureable forehead sebum. THere are more openings for hair on the forehead per square cm than anywhere else on the body, including the scalp. Ive posted studies for Armando that confirm this. He just ignores them, and will answer your assertions with ridiculous questions like "whats the genetic difference between healthy hairs up front and donor area hairs"? etc.[/quote]

Mr. Barry,

The only proof that you need is the fact that men with complete androgen insensitivity have hair. You can prove Armando wrong by simply acknowledging that those individuals exist.

Those individuals do not respond to androgens...in any way...at the level of the androgen receptor. The receptor is so defective that androgens have no effect on hair, sexual differentiation, or even sebum production. In those individuals, it doesn't matter what type of five alpha reductase is causing what response, because the truth of the matter is that androgens are not required for hair growth, and thus, sebum produced by androgens is not required for hair growth.

I'm tired of this pointless debate and I'm sure that you are, as well.

Here is a study that demonstrates that pre-adrenarchal children and those with androgen insensitivity syndrome produce NO SEBUM, and yet, children and those with androgen insensitivity syndrome obviously have hair. In my opinion, this discussion is over with regards to sebum being necessary for hair growth. Obviously, the sebaceous unit is required for hair growth, but sebum production is not necessary whatsoever.

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/conten ... t/76/2/524

Seriously, could there possibly be an older study? This discussion should have ended a long time ago.

"ABSTRACT The lack of demonstrable sebum in androgen-insensitive subjects
To evaluate the androgen control of sebum, subjects with complete
androgen insensitivity and male pseudohermaphrodites with inherited
5cu-reductase deficiency and decreased dihydrotestosterone (DHT) production had sebum production studied. A hydrophobic polymeric film applied to the forehead was used to measure sebum production through the use of air filled micropores. Sebum scores of normal preadrenarchal children (ages 2-6), and normal age-matched adult males and females, were studied as well as males treated with the 5a-reductase inhibitor, finasteride, for benign prostatic hyperplasia who were studied at baseline and after drug therapy.
Androgen insensitive subjects had no sebum production by this
methodology, and the results were identical to preadrenarchal children.
In contrast, adult male pseudohermaphrodites with 5cY-reductase deficiency and a selective decrease in DHT production had sebum production scores identical to normal age-matched males. Males with benign prostatic hyperplasia treated with the 5cu-reductase inhibitor, finasteride, to lower DHT levels did not decrease the sebum score from baseline values....."



There...it's done.

 

[Armando Jose]

Well, friends, I don't want wate your time, but your arguments are not all solid.

The study cited, like others, was only in forehead. I want one study on scalp hair. I also highly doubt that pseudohemaphrodites or CAIS subjets don't have sebum in scalp hair. How is his hair, not maleable, dry, or what?
There is a plenty of studies regarding the no-existence of hormones before puberty, but the scientis only analized blood and certains parts of body, and the few studies with scalp hairs, were positives in sebum and possibly hormones. Intracrinology could be the key (univ. Labal )

have a nice day

Armando

 

[Bryan]

Armando, while it's true that we can't prove that there is zero sebum in the scalp of individuals with CAIS, I think it's pretty obvious that at the very least, there is far less of it than there is in the scalp of a normal individual. How do you explain the fact that individuals with CAIS have such vigorous, flourishing hair growth, despite having (at most) a tiny, insignificant fraction of the scalp sebum production that normal individuals have?

 

[Armando Jose]

a picture is worth a thousand words
http://the-light.com/mens/samson/4/houseof5.jpg