New clinical trial intended to prove the Androgenetic Alopecia theory.

freakout

Experienced Member
Reaction score
3
Transplants from balding and hairy androgenetic alopecia scalp regrow hair comparably well on immunodeficient mice
Rozlyn A. Krajcik, PhD, Joseph H. Vogelman, DEE, Virginia L. Malloy, MS, and
Norman Orentreich, MD

DISCUSSION
The original intent of this study was to optimize the procedure of grafting human hair follicles onto immunodeficient mice to have a highly reproducible model system for evaluating treatments for Androgenetic Alopecia. To that end, various methods of transplantation were compared (data not shown), as were several strains of mice (National Institutes of Health Swiss nude and SCID) both male and female, and scalp skin from balding and hairy regions of numerous Androgenetic Alopecia male and female donors (28 males; 11 females).

What became apparent, contrary to the results reported by Van Neste et al,6 was that regardless of the method used and sex or strain of mice, grafts from
balding scalp produced pigmented terminal hairs equal in length and diameter to those produced by transplanted hair follicles from hairy, nonbalding scalp. We report here the results from 2 representative male donors in an experiment using female nude mice (Fig 3).

To minimize extraneous variables and to further verify these results, we then transplanted follicles from both the balding and hairy scalp areas from the
same individual, a female with clinically prominent Androgenetic Alopecia, to each of 7 female SCID mice. The results show that the regrowth of hair, irrespective of follicle
origin, is similar after transplantation onto immu-nodeficient mice (Fig 4). To our knowledge, this is the first study that compares the hair growth of balding and terminal scalp follicles from the same human being transplanted onto the same mouse and for both sexes with Androgenetic Alopecia.

To our knowledge, this is the first study that compares the hair growth of
balding and terminal scalp follicles from the same human being transplanted onto the same mouse and for both sexes with Androgenetic Alopecia. A key difference between this study and those previously reported6-8 appears to be the characteristics
of the pretransplantation hairs present on the selected scalp tissues. Van Neste, De Brouwer, and Dumortier6 specified the use of balding human scalp tissue only; the study then compared the growth characteristics of harvested hairs, posttransplantation, onto female nude mice, with the hairs growing in situ on the scalps of the male and female Androgenetic Alopecia donors. Information about the grade and duration of Androgenetic Alopecia in these donors was not provided. From the reported wide distribution of diameters of the hairs harvested from these balding sites,6 however, it appears that transitional scalp areas (ie, in the early process of balding yet still possessing a considerable number of terminal hairs) were the preferred sampling sites. On the basis of our observation that post-transplantation vellus hairs increase in diameter and terminal hairs decrease in diameter, a starting population of mixed hairs (vellus, terminal, thick terminal) as described6 would likely yield a final mean diameter close to the pre-transplantation mean diameter for the population, leading to the conclusion
that pretransplantation diameters are maintained. In our study, balding scalp tissue had only vellus hairs and hairy tissue had only thick, terminal hairs allowing a direct comparison of these hair types, pretransplantation and posttransplantation.

Sintov et al9 also specified balding grafts but did not report the mean diameter of the pretransplantation hairs. The pregrafted hairs probably constituted a more homogeneous population of fine, vellus hairs than those of Van Neste et al6 because at 68 days posttransplantation the grafted hairs on untreated male SCID mice had diameters from 10 to 20 m versus 30 to 40 m on antiandrogen-treated mice.9 Although this study is difficult to evaluate
relative to our data because of its shorter duration and the lack of information regarding pretransplantation diameters, it suggests that the males of some
strains of mice have systemic androgen levels high enough and/or the grafts retain sufficient 5-R activity to impede the growth of androgen-sensitive
hair follicles. In our experience, vellus hairs regrew as well on male as on female nude mice when evaluated at 6 months posttransplantation (data not
shown). Female mice were preferred because previous studies,6-8 to which we were comparing, specified females.

Human hair growth is subject to both inhibitor and promoter factors, but each follicle appears to be genetically programmed to be more sensitive to one
or the other of these factors and can be transplanted without losing this donor-dominant genetic characteristic. 12-14 The hormonal environment of childhood
allows all scalp hairs to grow to normal anagen size. At sexual maturity, the hormonal environment changes, and Androgenetic Alopecia commences in the genetically
predisposed. Androgenetic Alopecia is not the result of the loss of hair follicles, but rather a systematic involution of the follicle, which results in the transformation of terminal follicles to vellus follicles with no appreciable reduction in density.15 The volume of the dermal papilla, which depends largely on its cell number
and the amount of extracellular matrix, correlates with the size of the hair fiber produced.16,17 Several reports suggest that androgen-mediated alterations
in hair size occur through interaction with the dermal papilla.18-20

In human males, dihydrotestosterone (DHT) is required for Androgenetic Alopecia to occur in the genetically predisposed. Adults with pseudohermaphroditism type 2 have normal levels of T but significantly lower levels of DHT and do not show balding as do their healthy siblings.21 Systemic treatment to inhibit the metabolism of T to DHT in combination with local therapy to reduce the conversion by 5-R of T to DHT has produced hair regrowth in bald human scalp both in length and diameter.22-24 The process, however, is slow and not necessarily effective in all individuals.

The phenomenon occurring in the xenograft experiments reported here is quite different and dramatic: hypotrophic anagen and telogen hairs from balding scalp exhibiting only vellus hairs in situ regenerate very quickly. By 6 months, the ratio of the diameters of grafted to pretransplant vellus hairs exceeds 3:1 (Fig 3). Histologic examination of posttransplantation follicles from balding scalp also shows fully developed anagen follicles at 6 months (Fig 2).

The regeneration of vellus follicles occurs just as quickly on male as on female mice (data not shown); this suggests that a factor or factors other than androgen withdrawal may be involved but does not necessarily rule out that differences in androgen levels, availability, or both between human beings and mice account in part or entirely for the rapid vellus-to-terminal transformation of balding follicles. For instance, the activity of the 5-R enzyme(s) may be greatly reduced or absent in the transplanted follicles, thereby, limiting exposure of
the follicles to DHT. The accelerated transformation of vellus follicles on immunodeficient mice might then correspond to responses seen in balding men
treated with oral finasteride24 who are exceptionally good responders. However, in our clinical experience, females with Androgenetic Alopecia, including the female in
study II, frequently have normal androgen and androgen-binding globulin levels for their age and sex.

It is difficult to argue that lower systemic androgen levels in the female mouse environment (or higher in the case of the male mice) causes the rapid regeneration of vellus hair follicles from the human female. Therefore, the existence of an inhibitor factor other than androgens, particularly in women
showing diffuse/pattern alopecia,25 that is lacking in the nude mouse seems plausible. This could be some other steroid, hormone, cytokine, neuropeptide,
or an immunologically related factor.

The one-hair-cycle reversal of the miniaturized hair follicles of Androgenetic Alopecia, as demonstrated in this study, supports the hypothesis that miniaturization does
not occur gradually over many hair cycles, as conventionally thought, but may, in fact, be an abrupt, large-step process that can potentially reverse just as
quickly.26,27 The prompted new anagen as a result of postoperative effluvium that the transplanted follicles undergo in this experimental system may be an
added advantage, accelerating or even initiating the regeneration of vellus follicles.

The data also indicate that the mouse environment is less than optimal for the growth of follicles originating from hairy scalp. The rate of increase in length of these hairs appears to be close to normal or only slightly diminished, but the mean diameter is markedly reduced. Currently, there is no explanation for the diameters of the hairs from the balding area continuing to increase, whereas those from the nonbalding area plateau after 17 weeks. It is important to note that the slope of mean diameter growth in the balding hairs diminishes at the same time that the nonbalding hair mean diameter stops increasing (Fig 5).

Nonspecific factors such as differences in temperature, protein availability, or both between human beings and mice would be expected to affect balding and nonbalding grafts equally and may account for the fact that neither type of graft produces hairs equal to that found growing in situ in optimal regions (occipital) of the scalp. However, it is also possible that a growth factor or growth promoter
originally available to the nonbalding hair follicles in situ may be lacking or reduced in these mice. The same factor that inhibits Androgenetic Alopecia follicles28 may act as a trophic factor for non-Androgenetic Alopecia follicles.

In summary, this report demonstrates that balding, miniaturized follicles possess the potential to quickly regenerate once removed from the human
scalp and that the phenomenon applies equally to follicles from both men and women with Androgenetic Alopecia. These findings expand the use of this model beyond
a tool for screening potential therapies to one that may yield insight into the mechanisms involved in Androgenetic Alopecia induction in both men and women.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
freakout said:
Hello forumers. Studies Bryan and Merck do not want you to know.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20128792
"mechanisms other than direct androgen action contribute to this common form of hair loss".

Everybody should make a careful note of the fact that the poster "freakout" is very careful to make a glaring omission of the final TWO WORDS in the quotation above! The actual quotation goes this way:

"...suggesting that mechanisms other than direct androgen action contribute to this common form of hair loss in women."

Were those omissions by freakout just a purely accidental mistake, or was he "cherry-picking" words from a study to try to make us all believe that the normal occurrence of androgenetic alopecia in hundreds of millions of men around the world has nothing at all to do with androgens? :) :laugh:
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
freakout said:
The other, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12734505, is for both men and women. "Therefore, the existence of an inhibitor factor other than androgens"

LOL!! More "cherry-picking" from freakout! Once again, look at more of the FULL QUOTATION from that passage in the study:

"Therefore, the existence of an inhibitor factor other than androgens, particularly in women showing diffuse/pattern alopecia, that is lacking in the nude mouse seems plausible. This could be some other steroid, hormone, cytokine, neuropeptide, or an immunologically related factor."

By the way, when we first started talking about that study a few years ago (before "freakout" even started posting here), I made a special note of those last three words about the "immunologically related factor". Considering that lots of guys have for years made comments about how the immune system supposedly "attacks" hair follicles in guys who are balding, I found those last three words to be very worthy of note! Is it possible that the unusual results they obtained in this particular study has a lot to do with the fact that the human hairs were transplanted onto immunodeficient mice, or at the very least was an important factor?? :dunno: Makes me wonder...
 

freakout

Experienced Member
Reaction score
3
Bryan said:
"Therefore, the existence of an inhibitor factor other than androgens, particularly in women showing diffuse/pattern alopecia, that is lacking in the nude mouse seems plausible. This could be some other steroid, hormone, cytokine, neuropeptide, or an immunologically related factor."

By the way, when we first started talking about that study a few years ago (before "freakout" even started posting here), I made a special note of those last three words about the "immunologically related factor".

Fact: In both studies it was the researchers themsselve who said:
1. the existence of an inhibitor factor other than androgens
2. mechanisms other than direct androgen action

Fact: YOU refer to women's FPB as 'androgenetic'.
Hence, the studies applies to men as well. 'Cherry-picking' did not matter.

Fact: Hair follicles are immune-privileged (Jahoda).
Using immune-deficient mice makes sense only because the transplants contained scalp tissue. An immunologically related factor will affect the scalp but not the hair follicles.

ARE YOU SUGGESTING THE male pattern baldness IS NOT ANDROGENETIC BUT RATHER IMMUNOLOGICAL???? :woot: ... in all 28 men and 11 women? I don't agree with that. Andrgens has a lot to do with male pattern baldness.

I'm not arguing with you Bryan. I'm merely reopening the study so THEY can judge for themselves. Many here including finfigther and idontwanttobebalding got better brains than you have because they don't have a closed mindset. :)

Why are you reacting with rage?? It's just a study :) :) :) Trying to destroy my credibility does not matter because I don't have one being new on the forum. You however, should be carefull with all that rage! :woot: The more you react to my posts, the more I think you're hiding something.

Aren't you glad that there are studies questioning Androgenetic Alopecia? That men aren't being held hostage by their own hormones? And who knows what this forum might come up with and break the mystery of male pattern baldness.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
freakout said:
Why are you reacting with rage?? It's just a study :) :) :) Trying to destroy my credibility does not matter because I don't have one being new on the forum. You however, should be carefull with all that rage! :woot: The more you react to my posts, the more I think you're hiding something.

I'm not reacting to you with rage, I'm reacting to you with LAUGHTER. Anybody who would make such an astonishingly absurd statement like you've made that androgens have no "direct" effect on hair follicles clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.
 

freakout

Experienced Member
Reaction score
3
Laughter?? That should be an LOL. NOT a detailed reaction that include words like bullshit, silly wacky, emabarassing, absurd etc. - signs of rage!

Cherry picking? I posted the entire discussion, didnt I?

Twisting my words? Maybe I miss stating certain words but what I really meant was adverse direct effect as to kill hair follicles.

Is that all you can say. I just posted a detailed counter-reaction. Being an amateur, I don't mind losing - Im not the 'expert'. :)
 

hairhoper

Experienced Member
Reaction score
25
You're an idiot and a hack, deliberately misquoting studies.

Finasteride halts loss in 9/10 men. Antiandrogens work and Androgenetic Alopecia is a fact.
 

Boba155

Member
Reaction score
0
Why do you all flame on Freakout?

As far as I can see, he has presented legitimate studies which support his claim that androgens do not have a direct effect on the hair follicle. You all are still unable to disprove those studies. Yet you all still blast him for being "ignorant".

In Vitro studies do not translate into In Vivo studies. Theobromine applied to cell culture in vitro raises cAMP and induces melanin production. In vivo, it does not. Thus, the point of "androgens in vitro" should almost be considered null.

Please attempt to explain Freakout's discrepancies found in the current Androgenetic Alopecia theory. No one throughout this entire thread has attempted to do that. They just avoid it.

...could it be because Freakout is... RIGHT? Who knows. But please COMBAT his statements, rather than just blast HIM. His claims are legitamite.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
Boba155 said:
Why do you all flame on Freakout?

As far as I can see, he has presented legitimate studies which support his claim that androgens do not have a direct effect on the hair follicle. You all are still unable to disprove those studies.

Do you really believe that, or are you just teasing us?? :)
 

Boba155

Member
Reaction score
0
Bryan: I'm not joking. Please disprove it, no in vitro studies please. :)

And finasteride, I do agree SOME of his theories are stupid. However this one actually has some evidence behind it.
 

Boba155

Member
Reaction score
0
Direct androgen action upon hair follicles.

i.e. the study where a miniaturized hair was taken off balding scalp, placed onto mouse scalp, and then it grew a thick terminal hair.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
Boba155 said:
Bryan: I'm not joking. Please disprove it, no in vitro studies please. :)

Why are you specifying "no in vitro studies please"? How do you explain the ones I've already cited, by Happle & Hoffmann and Sawaya?
 

freakout

Experienced Member
Reaction score
3
Thanks Boba155. I appreciate your statement that "in vitro do not always translate to in vivo" specially coming from a biochemist. That's very much the case with antioxidants.

BTW, I didnt find those discrepancies. One was by idontwanttobebalding and the other was from a book. (I didn't expect idontwanttobebalding to get as far as where he is now in his personal research)
------------------

Some people would flipflop on their beliefs just to make another look bad. Bryan just made that huge mistake by flipflopping from androgenetics to immunologically related factors.

By trying to destroy my credibility, something I don't have, he miscalculated by going too far and accidentally acknowledged that male pattern baldness is caused by an immune-response. He also accidentally acknowledged the FPB is NOT 'androgenetic'. He destroyed his own credibility!

He accused me of 'cherry picking' even when I posted the entire discussion BEFORE he accused me. My "cherry-picking" was in fact merely highlighting the critical words. The thing is, his blind followers didn't even notice or chose to ignore those facts.

I don't mind getting caught up in Bryan's psywar but I also don't engage in that kind of tactic because people are smarter than they think. Most of them can tell but will just keep lurking.
-----------------------
A true expert will try and address discrepancies and expound from those studies - not discredit "the poster". Discrepancies always offer possibilities of breaking mysteries. For instance, it might explain why some treatments such as Rogaine are half effective.

Even cyberprimate could be on the verge of showing a discrepancy between the galea and the horseshoe area and might throw a monkey wrench on the Androgenetic Alopecia theory.
----------------------------
But the one thing that bothers me is the question of WHY Bryan goes to all extent to defend the status quo of Androgenetic Alopecia when he should be welcoming newer studies with him being a patient himself. Whose interest is he supporting? Is this forum his 'turf'? Why is he engaging psywar tactics? :dunno:
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
idontwanttobebalding said:
All I'm trying to say is....conventional treatments are fine, but only address hairloss via Androgenetic Alopecia. With Androgenetic Alopecia we are approaching hairloss in two ways:
change genes (which in the Androgenetic Alopecia view you can't) or change amount of T conversion into DHT(which does help..but exactly how it helps is still up for debate).

Why do you think that's "up for debate"? :dunno:
 

slurms mackenzie

Established Member
Reaction score
6
Could CB 03 01 raise dht levels? Genuine question.

If you bathed in the stuff, then would you have a load of DHT which couldn't attach to hair follicles and so would just hang around looking for somewhere else to go to.
 

Bryan

Senior Member
Staff member
Reaction score
42
idontwanttobebalding said:
Bryan said:
idontwanttobebalding said:
All I'm trying to say is....conventional treatments are fine, but only address hairloss via Androgenetic Alopecia. With Androgenetic Alopecia we are approaching hairloss in two ways:
change genes (which in the Androgenetic Alopecia view you can't) or change amount of T conversion into DHT(which does help..but exactly how it helps is still up for debate).

Why do you think that's "up for debate"? :dunno:

Dr. Rassman. (see my other post about American Indians, and DHT diet) Not what I wrote.....but what he did. Also, come to mention it...how about mature hairline....Androgenetic Alopecia or no? What about age related thinning with no loss just thinning of the hair? What about women's hair loss in a pattern? What about androgen effects on blood pressure? what about DHT effect on tendons? What about androgen effect on immune system? What about androgen effect on adipose? Androgen effect on inflammation? Epigenetics effecting gene expression? Why, while exposed to androgens it has always ignored before does a hair on the scalp in the galea area finally react (negatively). Why do hairs on the horseshoe area when exposed to high levels of androgens shrink as the hairs a little higher?
not just me......

viewtopic.php?p=609027#p609027

.....many questions....up for debate!

There are some good question in there, but what does any of that have to do with the specific question I asked you about why you think that the exact way that it helps to reduce the conversion of T into DHT is "up for debate"? :dunno:
 

freakout

Experienced Member
Reaction score
3
sir chugalot said:
... then would you have a load of DHT which couldn't attach to hair follicles and so would just hang around looking for somewhere else to go to.

It affects your blood pressure.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21271819

male pattern baldness is associated with moderate hypertension.
 
Top