My theory for Male Pattern Baldness, care to poke some holes

docj077

Senior Member
Reaction score
1
frailstar said:
docj077 said:
frailstar said:
lol So naive. First of all here is, in simple terms, how Type 1 diabetes works.

- A baby is not nursed long enough and is fed cow's milk protein, perhaps in an infant formula.

- The milk reaches the small intestine, where it is digested down to it's amino acid parts.

- For some infants, cow's milk is not fully digested, and small amino acid chains or fragments of the original protein remain in the intestine.

- These incompletely digested protein fragments may be absorbed into the blood.

- The immune system recognizes these fragments as foreign invaders and goes about destroying them.

- Unfortunately, some of the fragments look exactly the same as the cells of the pancreas that are responsible for making insulin.

- The immune system loses it's ability to distinguish between the cow's milk protein fragments and the pancreatic cells, and destroys them both, thereby eliminating the child's ability to produce insulin.

- The infant becomes a Type 1 diabetic, and remains so for the rest of his or her life.

The process boils down to a truly remarkable statement: cow's milk may cause one of the most devastating diseases that can befall a child. I'll let that sink in for a while and beg you in the mean time to pick up a copy of The China Study and educate yourself on diet and disease. What's it going to hurt? Read it and then tell me why this guy Colin Campbell is the biggest jackass in the world. You won't, because you're afraid that you're wrong and you can't have that.

And as for the vegan diet being dangerous and the bullshit about me not getting enough iron and crap, NOT TRUE. This is a big ol' myth. The only nutrient vegans may lack is B12 and that can be taken in pill form from a vegan source. I can also get it from nutritional yeast. Please stop telling people things that aren't true. In fact the opposite is true. I don't even take a daily vitamin and I am fine, better than fine in fact. I would be more worried about our non-vegan friends, as you will soon find out...

I'm about to scan in and post a nutritional breakdown of a vegan meal compared to a non-vegan meal. It clearly shows who's really lacking in vitamins. lol I can't believe some of the things people still think. It still amazes me.



Wow, you really have no idea how Type I Diabetes works. I have at least 5-10 studies right in front of me that demonstrate that the vast majority of patients with type I diabetes have had recent viral infection from coxsackie, echovirus, or epstein-barr viruses. In fact, studies have shown that viral infection of beta-cells within the pancreas induces type I diabetes. The viruses often contain genetic sequences that are very similar to genetic sequences within the beta-cells. Thus, you end up with an autoimmune disorder as the body can't tell the difference between viral code and human genetic code.


The most common progression of type I diabetes includes viral infection, cold/flu like symptoms, excessive thirst and urination, and finally a diagnosis of diabetes. There are a whole list of diabetogenic viruses that are accepted by the medical community as being highly infectious to the pancreatic islets.

Northern European ancestory and having the HLA subtypes HLA-DR3, DR4, and DQ are the factors that lead to the greatest chance of viral infection leading to an autoimmune disorder.

It isn't the milk. Not even close.

That's one thought on it, that imo is wrong. Meanwhile Type 1 diabetes continues to grow in this country. Start reading on page 187 in The China Study and then tell me I'm wrong. Or at least debate why the book is wrong. Let's have a discussion about it, I'd like to know a different view on this books, knock it off it's pedestal.

You have your view, but unfortunately, I have the studies that demonstrate the molecular mimicry through viral infection right in front of me. In fact, it's even mentioned in many textbooks. Mimicry through bovine milk proteins is a less accepted hypothesis in the medical community.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
docj077 said:
frailstar said:
Here is the vegetable protein vs. animal protein meal breakdown. Now tell me that it's vegans who have the wrong diet.

http://www.reflectdesign.com/livejourna ... akdown.jpg

I have to chuckle when you put stuff like this up. During the processing of the majority of the foods that vegans eat, the majority of the vitamins and minerals are lost, so the foods are fortified.

If vegan diets are so healthy, then why do children that breastfeed from vegan women end up suffering from vitamin deficiency?

The vegan diet is definitely healthier in terms of cutting fats and losing weight, but it's incredibly flawed in terms of what you're missing. B12, Carnitine, CoQ10, and creatine are all missing. Many become vitamin deficient, because the lack of fat in the diet prevents vitamin A,D,E, and K absorption. Taking a supplement will not raise the levels of these vitamins in the body without proper fat intake as they are fat soluble.

Vegan diets in newborns delays and disrupts the development of the brain and sex organs. The vegan diet is typically high in soy. Soy is incredibly toxic at the doses that most vegans take. Between the large amounts of phytoestrogens and the toxic effects on the thyroid, soy as a protein source is quite flawed.

lol Soy is not the only source for protein for a vegan. Did you even read that comparison? It said nothing about soy. Now you're just making sh*t up. I rarely eat soy. I drink rice milk over soy milk, so you're wrong. If a vegan isn't getting enough fat well they aren't doing it right. I eat 40 grams of fat a day. My fat comes from corn oil, nuts, olive oil. So to say vegans can't get fat is just dead wrong. Fat does not have to come from an animal, in fact if you don't want heart disease I would advice against it. You clearly have something in your head against vegan diets. You've also proved that you are very misinformed about vegan diets.

As for the breast-feeding vegan moms...

http://www.vegetarianbaby.com/articles/ ... info.shtml

Just be healthy and make sure you are doing the right things. It's not hard. You are overstating things to make a point.
 

docj077

Senior Member
Reaction score
1
frailstar said:
lol Soy is not the only source for protein for a vegan. Did you even read that comparison? It said nothing about soy. Now you're just making $#iT up. I rarely eat soy. I drink rice milk over soy milk, so you're wrong. If a vegan isn't getting enough fat well they aren't doing it right. I eat 40 grams of fat a day. My fat comes from corn oil, nuts, olive oil. So to say vegans can't get fat is just dead wrong. Fat does not have to come from an animal, in fact if you don't want heart disease I would advice against it. You clearly have something in your head against vegan diets. You've also proved that you are very misinformed about vegan diets.

As for the breast-feeding vegan moms...

http://www.vegetarianbaby.com/articles/ ... info.shtml

Just be healthy and make sure you are doing the right things. It's not hard. You are overstating things to make a point.

Actually, I used to be a vegan and it is a very unhealthy lifestyle when compared to other dieting methods.

Also, I never said that soy is the only source of protein, nor did I say that animal fat is required. I simply stated that excess soy (soy burger and other soy products) in excess and low fat dieting are extremely unhealthy for the human body. Plant protein is not as accessible to the human body. Human beings to not have the necessary enzymes for proper plant digestion and they have evolved to become omnivores. The vegan diet is archaeic in terms of human evolution.

If you ever dissect and study a human being, you'll notice that they have all the tools necessary to be omnivorous beings.

So, the LOL actually is directed at you for making assumptions.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
docj077 said:
frailstar said:
lol Soy is not the only source for protein for a vegan. Did you even read that comparison? It said nothing about soy. Now you're just making $#iT up. I rarely eat soy. I drink rice milk over soy milk, so you're wrong. If a vegan isn't getting enough fat well they aren't doing it right. I eat 40 grams of fat a day. My fat comes from corn oil, nuts, olive oil. So to say vegans can't get fat is just dead wrong. Fat does not have to come from an animal, in fact if you don't want heart disease I would advice against it. You clearly have something in your head against vegan diets. You've also proved that you are very misinformed about vegan diets.

As for the breast-feeding vegan moms...

http://www.vegetarianbaby.com/articles/ ... info.shtml

Just be healthy and make sure you are doing the right things. It's not hard. You are overstating things to make a point.

Actually, I used to be a vegan and it is a very unhealthy lifestyle when compared to other dieting methods.

Also, I never said that soy is the only source of protein, nor did I say that animal fat is required. I simply stated that excess soy (soy burger and other soy products) in excess and low fat dieting are extremely unhealthy for the human body. Plant protein is not as accessible to the human body. Human beings to not have the necessary enzymes for proper plant digestion and they have evolved to become omnivores. The vegan diet is archaeic in terms of human evolution.

If you ever dissect and study a human being, you'll notice that they have all the tools necessary to be omnivorous beings.

So, the LOL actually is directed at you for making assumptions.

First of all, although plant proteins may be lacking in one or more of the essential amino acids, as a group they do contain all of them. Colin Campbell argues, quite effectively, that "low-quality" plant protein, which allows for slow but steady synthesis of new proteins, is the healthiest type of protein. Slow but steady wins the race.

Actually, if you want to get down to it, human flesh has just the right amount of amino acids, animals are the next best thing. Don't see anyone running out and eating each other though.

So although your argument makes sense passingly, it's not the best diet for ultimate health.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
35
beaner said:
Bryan said:
BTW, what happened to the newer poster's comment about that use of the word "dairy"?? I was going to reply to what HE said, but now it's gone! :freaked:

I deleted it to rewrite it and then realized that I really didn't care.

Anyway, I'm curious as to what your response was. I really don't understand your problem with the way he used the word dairy. You keep stressing he was using it as a NOUN and the definition I posted indicated that one use of the word dairy was as a noun meaning "dairy products collectively". It seems to me that the context in which he used the word...The chinese don't eat alot of dairy....(meaning dairy products collectively...plural) makes perfect sense and I don't understand what the issue was with it. I've heard it used that way before which is what prompted me to look up the definition.

Am I totally missing something?

What you're missing is that even if you DID find such a definition for that word in some recent dictionaries, it's a relatively new addition, based on the vulgarization of that word among people who didn't know any better. It's not all that surprising, because the English language is a dynamic thing, and gradually evolves over the decades. Even the word ain't can be found in most dictionaries, even though it's clearly illiterate, because it's nevertheless in common use. Even dictionaries have to keep up with the times, I suppose, by adding new slang words and new definitions for standard words from time-to-time, whenever lexicographers feel that it's sufficiently justified. However, that doesn't mean that _I_ personally feel that such a new defintion for dairy is either justified, or literate! :wink:

BTW, I have four different dictionaries in my possession (mostly older ones), and not a single one of them lists that definition for the word "dairy". I still consider that usage to be both hillbilly and laughable! :D
 

Felk

Senior Member
Reaction score
4
docj077 said:
I simply stated that excess soy (soy burger and other soy products) in excess and low fat dieting are extremely unhealthy for the human body.

Define what you mean by "low fat dieting" here. I'm assuming you mean reducing fats to an extreme?
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
Bryan said:
beaner said:
Bryan said:
BTW, what happened to the newer poster's comment about that use of the word "dairy"?? I was going to reply to what HE said, but now it's gone! :freaked:

I deleted it to rewrite it and then realized that I really didn't care.

Anyway, I'm curious as to what your response was. I really don't understand your problem with the way he used the word dairy. You keep stressing he was using it as a NOUN and the definition I posted indicated that one use of the word dairy was as a noun meaning "dairy products collectively". It seems to me that the context in which he used the word...The chinese don't eat alot of dairy....(meaning dairy products collectively...plural) makes perfect sense and I don't understand what the issue was with it. I've heard it used that way before which is what prompted me to look up the definition.

Am I totally missing something?

What you're missing is that even if you DID find such a definition for that word in some recent dictionaries, it's a relatively new addition, based on the vulgarization of that word among people who didn't know any better. It's not all that surprising, because the English language is a dynamic thing, and gradually evolves over the decades. Even the word ain't can be found in most dictionaries, even though it's clearly illiterate, because it's nevertheless in common use. Even dictionaries have to keep up with the times, I suppose, by adding new slang words and new definitions for standard words from time-to-time, whenever lexicographers feel that it's sufficiently justified. However, that doesn't mean that _I_ personally feel that such a new defintion for dairy is either justified, or literate! :wink:

BTW, I have four different dictionaries in my possession (mostly older ones), and not a single one of them lists that definition for the word "dairy". I still consider that usage to be both hillbilly and laughable! :D

So this is the glue that keeps your fragile ego together. Pity.
 

beaner

Senior Member
Reaction score
43
Bryan said:
beaner said:
Bryan said:
BTW, what happened to the newer poster's comment about that use of the word "dairy"?? I was going to reply to what HE said, but now it's gone! :freaked:

I deleted it to rewrite it and then realized that I really didn't care.

Anyway, I'm curious as to what your response was. I really don't understand your problem with the way he used the word dairy. You keep stressing he was using it as a NOUN and the definition I posted indicated that one use of the word dairy was as a noun meaning "dairy products collectively". It seems to me that the context in which he used the word...The chinese don't eat alot of dairy....(meaning dairy products collectively...plural) makes perfect sense and I don't understand what the issue was with it. I've heard it used that way before which is what prompted me to look up the definition.

Am I totally missing something?

What you're missing is that even if you DID find such a definition for that word in some recent dictionaries, it's a relatively new addition, based on the vulgarization of that word among people who didn't know any better. It's not all that surprising, because the English language is a dynamic thing, and gradually evolves over the decades. Even the word ain't can be found in most dictionaries, even though it's clearly illiterate, because it's nevertheless in common use. Even dictionaries have to keep up with the times, I suppose, by adding new slang words and new definitions for standard words from time-to-time, whenever lexicographers feel that it's sufficiently justified. However, that doesn't mean that _I_ personally feel that such a new defintion for dairy is either justified, or literate! :wink:

BTW, I have four different dictionaries in my possession (mostly older ones), and not a single one of them lists that definition for the word "dairy". I still consider that usage to be both hillbilly and laughable! :D

Exactly the pompous response that I anticipated. The fact of the matter is, whether or not it's in your dictionary/vocabulary, it's still recognized as a noun. By the way, we prefer to be called "rednecks". "Hillbilly" is a little outdated, kind of 1960's, don't you think? It's time to update your dictionary Bryan, and to stop giving English lessons on a hair loss forum.
 

docj077

Senior Member
Reaction score
1
Felk said:
docj077 said:
I simply stated that excess soy (soy burger and other soy products) in excess and low fat dieting are extremely unhealthy for the human body.

Define what you mean by "low fat dieting" here. I'm assuming you mean reducing fats to an extreme?

Yes. Also, many nutrients need the presence of fats in order to be absorbed, which means taking your daily multivitamin means nothing unless you have a fat source around.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
This is the chart that sparked the idea for my theory on milk consumption and male pattern baldness. If you replaced diabetes with male pattern baldness in this chart, could you basically see the same chart? I'm asking because I don't know or have the numbers for male pattern baldness in Finland or any of the other places listed in the chart. But rural Japan matches on this chart. Does anyone know about the other countries?

http://www.reflectdesign.com/livejournal/type1chart.jpg

I did find this though, http://www.drmirkin.com/women/2339.html
 

docj077

Senior Member
Reaction score
1
frailstar said:

Just like with Type I diabetes, one's predisposition toward developing PCOS is genetically mediated. Diseases that are claimed to be "environmental" usually tend to run in families, which means that it's genes first and the stupid things that people do second.

You can run around in circles trying to find an environmental link, but one's ability to develop these diseases relies on genetic mutation.
 

wookster

Experienced Member
Reaction score
0
docj077 said:
frailstar said:

Just like with Type I diabetes, one's predisposition toward developing PCOS is genetically mediated. Diseases that are claimed to be "environmental" usually tend to run in families, which means that it's genes first and the stupid things that people do second.

You can run around in circles trying to find an environmental link, but one's ability to develop these diseases relies on genetic mutation.

All humans probably have baldness genes. :hairy:
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
docj077 said:
frailstar said:

Just like with Type I diabetes, one's predisposition toward developing PCOS is genetically mediated. Diseases that are claimed to be "environmental" usually tend to run in families, which means that it's genes first and the stupid things that people do second.

You can run around in circles trying to find an environmental link, but one's ability to develop these diseases relies on genetic mutation.

You didn't really respond to the Type 1 chart, any reason you are ignoring it? You also might want to ignore the next page and spare yourself the embarrassment.

http://www.gypsycharm.com/pics/type1pg2.jpg
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
Back to the concerns Doctor had about not getting vitamins A, D and B12 on a vegan diet.

Although it's true that these vitamins can only be found in animal-based foods, What he failed to tell you is that these are nonessential vitamins. Meaning vitamin A can be readily made by our bodies from beta-carotene, and vitamin D can be made by exposing our skin to fifteen minutes of sunshine every couple of days. Both of these vitamins are toxic if they are consumed in high amounts.

Also you can get B12 vitamins from vegetables if the vegetables are grown from B12 rich soil. This is hard to do though because most the agriculture takes place on relatively lifeless soil. This is a minor annoyance compared to heart disease, cancer and Type 1 and 2 diabetes. I'd much rather take my risk with developing a B12 deficiency than go through chemo or take shots every day.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0

michael barry

Senior Member
Reaction score
12
Frailstar,


Its pretty obvious to me that you are just "bobmer" or any other number of naturals folks who emanate from immortal hair that periodically come to "attack" this site with the dietary theory of male pattern baldness.


I remind you again, there are fat, lazy people who have horrible diets that have full thick heads of hair into old age. Our family has several of these. The very existence of these people proves your ideas incorrect.






That picture alone disproves your thesis. The reason, for the umpteenth time, that the old Japanese diet might have ---delayed---male pattern baldness is that green tea and soya have anti-androgenic effects and high albium levels, which help bind free testosterone also, are correlated with high fish consumption. Thats it, there is nothing more to it.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
michael barry said:
Frailstar,


Its pretty obvious to me that you are just "bobmer" or any other number of naturals folks who emanate from immortal hair that periodically come to "attack" this site with the dietary theory of male pattern baldness.


I remind you again, there are fat, lazy people who have horrible diets that have full thick heads of hair into old age. Our family has several of these. The very existence of these people proves your ideas incorrect.






That picture alone disproves your thesis. The reason, for the umpteenth time, that the old Japanese diet might have ---delayed---male pattern baldness is that green tea and soya have anti-androgenic effects and high albium levels, which help bind free testosterone also, are correlated with high fish consumption. Thats it, there is nothing more to it.

How does a picture of John Goodman prove anything? I'm not saying that everyone that drinks milk will go bald. Not everyone that drinks milk as an infant will develop Type 1 diabetes or cancer or heart disease either. Put if you do have suck *** male pattern baldness genes than drinking milk will trigger the male pattern baldness, just as it does in infants who develop Type 1 from drinking milk.

Simplified: drinking cow's milk will trigger genes that cause male pattern baldness just as it does in Type 1.

What are your thoughts on the Type 1 and cow's milk stuff? Have you read that? Why is it so far fetched to believe the same thing could be true for male pattern baldness? I mean, this is only a wild concept if you can't even grasp the Type 1 and milk connection.
 

retropunk

Established Member
Reaction score
0
docj077 said:
frailstar said:

Just like with Type I diabetes, one's predisposition toward developing PCOS is genetically mediated. Diseases that are claimed to be "environmental" usually tend to run in families, which means that it's genes first and the stupid things that people do second.

You can run around in circles trying to find an environmental link, but one's ability to develop these diseases relies on genetic mutation.

I was actually going to respond that link, but it's really fruitless. He's going to continue to think that cow's milk and a diet with meat is going to cause all your health problems.
 

retropunk

Established Member
Reaction score
0
frailstar said:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/hurtful-food-cows-milk-and-kids-arent-made-for-each-other.html

Will you stop posting links without trying to correlate anything from them to your discussion.

Do you have any viable proof that milk causes type-1 diabetes? A survey showing a country with type-1 and milk consumption is not proof. It's bad science.

However, if you can somehow find data that shows four groups (CM consumption/no diabetes, CM consumption/diabetes, no CM consumption/no diabetes, and no CM consumption/diabetes), then maybe I'll see the light.
 

frailstar

Established Member
Reaction score
0
retropunk said:
frailstar said:
http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/hurtful-food-cows-milk-and-kids-arent-made-for-each-other.html

Will you stop posting links without trying to correlate anything from them to your discussion.

Do you have any viable proof that milk causes type-1 diabetes? A survey showing a country with type-1 and milk consumption is not proof. It's bad science.

However, if you can somehow find data that shows four groups (CM consumption/no diabetes, CM consumption/diabetes, no CM consumption/no diabetes, and no CM consumption/diabetes), then maybe I'll see the light.

Yes there is proof. Read this page, http://www.gypsycharm.com/pics/type1pg2.jpg

If you read The China Study book you will understand more. It goes into greater detail. I'm sorry you can't see the connection with just those 2 pages. I'm obviously not going to scan the entire book in and post it. If reading those 2 pages on Type 1 online isn't compelling enough, than I'd check my pulse. Why do I continue to have these discussions about The China Study with people who haven't even read it anyway? This is fruitless. You are trying to discuss something with me that you don't know anything about.
 
Top