New clinical trial intended to prove the Androgenetic Alopecia theory.

[Bryan]

http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v128/n6/full/5701200a.html

"In this study, we propose an hypothesis suggesting that the hair follicle developed in a primitive multicellular oil gland and that the hair shaft growing from that follicle served initially merely as a wick to draw the product of the gland to the skin surface to fortify the primitive permeability barrier..."

Everybody please note here that I've already cited an earlier study by Kligman and his colleagues which found that in humans, sebum has no propensity whatsoever to be drawn along the hair shaft as if it were a "wick". All the material provided in the article above about hairs supposedly acting as "wicks" is apparently just pure speculation on the part of those authors, and an effort to make us think that there might ever have been some important relationship between hairs and sebum.

 

[freakout]

We can always assume that sebum is not needed for hair to grow. But why is it when I wash my hair with shampoo with no conditioner, it becomes coarse when I slide my hand over them? It appears as if something that makes it smooth was drawn from it?

 

[Bryan]

Sebum, obviously. When you shampoo your hair, you wash the sebum off that was accumulated from combing your hair, touching or scratching your head, sleeping on a pillow, etc.

 

[freakout]

Ahh, thank Bryan. I owe you some due admiration for sticking to scientific studies even in the face of contradicting studies despite your intimidating remarks The guys back there are doing a great job twisting the studies, you don't need to be there.

So can we then hypothesize that since to top of our heads never touch a pillow and that since men never brush their hair as often as women do, sebum accumulation can contribute to some form of non-androgenic hair loss?

 

[freakout]

Sebum, obviously. When you shampoo your hair, you wash the sebum off that was accumulated from combing your hair, touching or scratching your head, sleeping on a pillow, etc.

If sebum were not essential in long hair, wouldn't women have a problem untangling coarse hair?

 

[Bryan]

So can we then hypothesize that since to top of our heads never touch a pillow and that since men never brush their hair as often as women do, sebum accumulation can contribute to some form of non-androgenic hair loss?

I'm not sure that sebum could have any effect on the loss of hair, one way or the other. There appears to be _some_ DHT in sebum (sorry to focus on DHT specifically, like so many other posters on hairloss sites do), but I'm not convinced that would have any significant effect on scalp hair.

 

[Bryan]

If sebum were not essential in long hair, wouldn't women have a problem untangling coarse hair?

Not sure.

 

[freakout]

I Broke the Mystery of Male Pattern Baldness download pdf

elevated head (on pillow) effect blood pressure to scalp?

Under normal circumstances, it won't make any difference. It will if a person is extremely low on blood volume - such a condition will prevent a person from standing. Why?

 

[armandein]

http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v128/n6/full/5701200a.html

"In this study, we propose an hypothesis suggesting that the hair follicle developed in a primitive multicellular oil gland and that the hair shaft growing from that follicle served initially merely as a wick to draw the product of the gland to the skin surface to fortify the primitive permeability barrier..."

Everybody please note here that I've already cited an earlier study by Kligman and his colleagues which found that in humans, sebum has no propensity whatsoever to be drawn along the hair shaft as if it were a "wick". All the material provided in the article above about hairs supposedly acting as "wicks" is apparently just pure speculation on the part of those authors, and an effort to make us think that there might ever have been some important relationship between hairs and sebum.

Please Bryan, Don't beat around the bush, get to the point!
No hair whatsoever without sebaceous gland, the studies with asebia mouse are quite categorical.
If hairs ever have a sebaceous gland, it will be for some compelling reason.

 

[freakout]

Please Bryan, Don't beat around the bush, get to the point!

Bryan is a Terminator Model T100. He was sent back from the future by Skynet.

It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. Read my posts if you want to live.

The liquid or semi-liquid properties of oily substances give them the tendency to creep.

 

[freakout]

But why is it when I wash my hair with shampoo with no conditioner, it becomes coarse when I slide my hand over them? It appears as if something that makes it smooth was drawn from it?

Sebum, obviously. When you shampoo your hair, you wash the sebum off that was accumulated from combing your hair, touching or scratching your head, sleeping on a pillow, etc.

I think Bryan just broke the mystery of male baldness. :bravo:

The pillow seems to be making a good job absorbing excess sebum since the areas of the scalp that rests on a pillow keep growing thick terminal hair!

What do you think guys? :whistle:

 

[squeegee]

DHT is necessary for proper hairgrow btw.

Squeegee, can you give me some of what you've beeen smoking? :dunno:

Bryan.. I think you lighted up the joint first.. saying that severe manutrition cause hairloss...lol what about the old saying.. dht sensitivity lol That is so old school.. !!!! Dunno why nobody here don't have a full head of hair after taking dutasteride or finasteride for years? Bryan.. Can I see your head full of hair please? As I can remember.. My hair was thick as f*** when I was a teenager loaded of DHT.. Bryan unless you are getting paid by Pfizer you should stop blablating the same sh*t..your spam bot need an update.

 

[Bryan]

Okay, squeegee, so you think androgens are needed to grow scalp hair... Okaaaaaay... thanks for sharing that with the rest of us! :shock:

 

[optimus prime]

OK, I'm going to make a summary. Correct me if I am wrong.

Summary:

1. Everyone on this thread believes DHT plays a part in hair loss.

2. One group led by Freakout believe there is another factor also involved. Because DHT is in every male, but only some get male pattern baldness and male pattern baldness progresses at different rates he thinks there is a second factor that determines this. None the less he believes DHT plays a part.

If this second factor can be controlled then it does not matter how much DHT you have, you will not suffer male pattern baldness.

3. The second group, led by Bryan and others believe that DHT is the culprit and the progression of hair loss depends on the sensitivity of the folicles. Yet they don't know what determines why some follicles are sensitive and why they get more sensitive over time (So put it down to genetics).


So, it seems to be that you both have almost the exact same theory, but one group believe there is something that makes the follicles sensitive to DHT (but don't know what) and the second group think the hair follicle is sensitive (but don't know why).

 

[freakout]

Thank for putting it into a summary that everyone can grasp.

One group led by Freakout believe there is another factor also involved ... but don't know what.

Excuse me! I know what it is! Here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8628793
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2715645

Androgens + genes + blood supply = male pattern baldness
I also know the why and the how.

The second group, by Bryan ... believe that DHT is the culprit and the progression of hair loss depends on the sensitivity of the folicles. Yet they don't know why some follicles ... so put it down to genetics.

We all have DHT or androgens which means that Androgenetic Alopecia proponents have nothing else but genetics to account for baldness. But what is genetics, really? It is the belief that genes control life.

In 2001, the Human Genome Project revealed that, of the expected 140,000, humans have only about 23,000 genes - a number is no more than what monkeys have. In fact, some worms have more than 18,000.

So the question is, how can specific genes be responsible for encoding specific proteins if there are only 23,000 for the more than 100,000 proteins? The next is, why would a gene repeat itself a thousand times to a hundred thousand times over in the human genome if they carry specific traits?

What did the project reveal? That our superiority over other animals is NOT defined by our genes but by LIFE - that life controls genes - not the other way around.

So what is genetics, really? Conventional beliefs in genetics was and had been 50 years of junk science. The project revealed that we can no longer assign specific traits to specific genes.

The results of project is the reason why epigenetics and genomics are recently being given more attention particularly epigenetics for cancer research. There is also a $10,000,000 prize to anyone who develops a system to map 100 human genomes in ten days for $10,000 per genome.

Epigenetics states that gene expression is under the regulatory control of environmental signals that act through epigenetic mechanisms’.

Hence if I were to restate Androgenetic Alopecia according to emerging sciences:
androgens + genes + environmental trigger = male pattern baldness

 

[optimus prime]

Thank for putting it into a summary that everyone can grasp.

One group led by Freakout believe there is another factor also involved ... but don't know what.

Excuse me! I know what it is! Here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8628793
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2715645

Androgens + genes + blood supply = male pattern baldness
I also know the why and the how.

Yea, very interesting theory Freakout. Thanks.

Any ideas on how to improve or control the blood flow?

 

[optimus prime]

Freakout, does what Darkdays says in another thread backup your theory and do you agree with him?

What if, and this is only a wild swing, the reason why it is harder to get hair back that has been lost longer, and despite treatment, is because of atherosclerosis.

Remember that there are studies showing that those who have pattern baldness(as I think this applies to both genders in more ways than most suspect) are more likely to have various issues with their vascular system, and the head, the infamous horseshoe area, is mostly small capillaries and no larger veins. This in turn gives the follicles less materials to work with(oxygen and nutrients) which then causes DNA damage in the follicle.

Dihydrotestosterone suppresses foam cell formation and attenuates atherosclerosis development.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20427482

Now remember, Minoxidil is a vasodilator so it might actually be taking those veins filled with gunk and making them wider giving the follicle both more blood.

This might explain why wounding works for some as the wound healing initiates angiogenesis that creates new capillaries.

I at least would say that this explains why some people who have been bald for a very long time and then lose all DHT can't grow back their hair completely, as the capillaries are just basically not managing to get enough crap into the follicle, plus the DHT has already damaged the veins.

I know that some will say "but if I cut my hair my scalp bleeds so there is blood there, your theory doesn't hold up!"

Now take into account that it is a question of how much the blood is actually delivering and whether it is managing to get enough to the scalp. There is definitely blood there, but what it is managing to deliver is also of essence and whether it is getting crap out at the same time.

Edit

I also wanted to add that atherosclerosis might explain why finasteride and such lose efficiacy over time as the placque continues to form despite the big 3.

viewtopic.php?f=32&t=63229&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=70

 

[freakout]

Fantastic post freakout! :bravo: You have explained the core of your beliefs regarding male pattern baldness, how it differs from the conventional paradigm, and sited some proof to back it up. I better understand from where you are coming from...

"Fantastic" sounds like "incredible". :woot: I never expected that reaction because I thought I had you convinced already. But that's alright. If that's any credit, it's Mercado's. It gave him away as a radical working inside the industry which is probably the reason he's using a pen name. Mainstream can be nasty to radicals.

Hey, you still on Revivogen? Is it really an inhibitor or blocker? Remember the mouse study. Androgens' affect follicles indirectly.

It's the action of androgens in the large muscles in the body that affects scalp hair follicles - the very reason finasteride has to be taken orally. The suggestion of 'direct miniaturizing effect' was either a diversion or they never really knew how DHT does its thing.

Producing and testing topical anti-androgens will be a cinch for Merck. With all the law suits coming, they should have been the first in the market if it works. I'll bet my balls they won't get any positive results from topical RU.

 

[freakout]

Yea, very interesting theory Freakout. Thanks.
Any ideas on how to improve or control the blood flow?

The theory is Mercado's.

The study on lower blood flow in balding men, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2715645, is only an association rather than causation. Even at 2.6 times lower, it has enough blood flow to supply a lot more than 10 heads of hair. However, the study still implies low blood supply.

I'm pretty convinced minoxidil has some unknown regrowing properties in addition to its vasodilative properties. The problem is it's not as effective as it should be. The reason is, while vasodilation improves blood flow, blood flow may only be half of the problem.

The second study, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8628793 , provides clues to the other problem - local blood pressure - which minoxidil cannot fix. No massage can fix it. This is where Mercado's Physiological Countermeasures come in. Apply them along with Rogaine and you should get more results than with Rogaine alone.

 

[optimus prime]

I'll bet my balls they won't get any positive results from topical RU.

I don't understand. People with Androgenetic Alopecia do get results with RU don't they?