Shampoo and hairloss?

[Johnny24601]

I am sure there is some sort of rationale answer for this question, but if chemicals contained in our shampoo (like SLS) are to blame for hairloss then why does hairloss always occur on the top of the head and not the sides of the head? Both areas receive virtually the same amount of shampoo, yet thinning and recession occurs only on the top of head.
My point....at the absolute most one can only claim that shampoos may have some sort of effect on the rate of hairloss and cannot be a cause of hairloss because then the entire head would bald because the entire head is shampooed. My point furthers the concept that it is genetics that ultimately decides whether one goes bald and not environment. I think that people who make statements that shampoos are destroying our follicles are (for the most part) at a stage in which they are not accepting their hairloss because they never thought that they'd go bald and are in a state of denial. They just can't believe that it has happened to them and want to find another answer to gain "control" over their situation. IMO of course.
On another note, many of the products that some people may claim to be hurting our scalp may also be helping to improve the "look" of our hair by providing better cleansing of our hair and or scalp. Perhaps it is more of a catch 22 then people realize as people always focus on the negative aspects of the chemicals contained in our cleaning products and do not mention the positives of having cleaning products that do a great job because and not despite of their additives.
Thoughts?

 

[Pondle]

The theory that shampoo causes hair loss is bunkum. For one thing, men went bald before shampoo use became widespread. Secondly, it appears that the overwhelming majority of women, children, and the 1/3 or so of men who do not experience male pattern baldness are totally unaffected. If someone comes back with the whole, "ah yes, but shampoo contributes to loss in a man genetically pre-disposed to it" argument, that violates the principle of Occam's razor.

 

[The Gardener]

Whoa buddy, cut down on the shampoo!

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Whoa buddy, cut down on the shampoo!

lmao, you always pull that chimp pic outta ya ***, I bet you got a blown up pic hanging in ur bedroom

I actually agree with you on this one tho

 

[JayB]

how are you going to post the exact same fcking thread that is right below your topic and 4 pages long.

 

[Armando Jose]

the same with stress, diet, cholesterol, ..., and hormones, what happen with hormones? Are afecting only certain hairs?

If genetic is the key, I would like have a great proof, but I don't encounter one good.

Armando

 

[The Gardener]

lmao, you always pull that chimp pic outta ya ***, I bet you got a blown up pic hanging in ur bedroom

Yes, he is my son.

Don't ask, its a long story involving a backpacking trip to South Africa I took as a teenager... and way too much ecstacy than I was able to handle.

 

[Pondle]

the same with stress, diet, cholesterol, ..., and hormones, what happen with hormones? Are afecting only certain hairs?

If genetic is the key, I would like have a great proof, but I don't encounter one good.

Armando

Yes you do - men with male pattern baldness have more DHT and more androgen receptors in their scalp than non-balding men. These features are inherited.

 

[dietcola]

man am i tired of this shampoo vs. male pattern baldness conversation.

SHAMPOO CAUSES male pattern baldness

TOOTHPASTE CAUSES DECAY

SHAVING CAUSES WRINKLES

CAVEMEN WERE BEAUTIFUL MAFUKKASSSSS

 

[Diamond Dave]

Secondly, it appears that the overwhelming majority of women, children, and the 1/3 or so of men who do not experience male pattern baldness are totally unaffected.

Women totally unaffected????
Then explain the Women's Hair Loss section if this forum.

Children have not been using shampoo long enough. Wait till their late teens.

 

[The Gardener]

Baldness in women is far less common than it is in men. Considering the amount of shampoo that they use relative to men, they should have HIGHER rates of hairloss.

And your line about women being more "genetically predisposed" to retain hair, although true, does not support your argument, it actually proves genetics as the cause of male pattern baldness even more strongly. Additionally, I checked out your website, and it claims that it is the acidity of shampoo that is causing the hairloss. If this is the case, as both mens and women's hair is both made of the same protein structure, the acidity should affect both equally.

And what of the men who have NO balding or recession? These people use shampoos. If the acidity of shampoo is the culprit, then all males should be losing their hair in the same way.

Lastly, the funny thing is that acid is not harmful to keratin... hair is more susceptible to weakening from alkaline substances, on the complete other end of the ph scale.

You keep coming back with the same tired and impotent responses. Let's hear some science behind your claims.

 

[Johnny24601]

re:

JayB,
That thread is disjointed and too long to follow, I wanted something with more clarity so I could make my attempt to end the idea that shampoo is causing male pattern baldness. Most people won't follow a 4 page thread, so I felt my question would go mostly unanswered or undiscussed.
Anyways, I would make one final point that there could be some value in a discussion as to whether an all natural shampoo can improve the look or our hair, but that discussion would be relevant to all men and women and not just men with male pattern baldness. It is clear to me that male pattern baldness is not caused by shampoo use and shampoo is not killing our hair follicles. However, because men with male pattern baldness are already dealing with crappy looking hair, I suppose there COULD be value in a natural shampoo that could improve the look of anyone's hair. Of course I have seen no scientific evidence to correlate the above statement. I hope I did not confuse anyone.

 

[Pondle]

Secondly, it appears that the overwhelming majority of women, children, and the 1/3 or so of men who do not experience male pattern baldness are totally unaffected.

Women totally unaffected????
Then explain the Women's Hair Loss section if this forum.

I said overwhelming majority of women. And women with male pattern baldness typically do not lose as much hair as men, again because of relatively lower androgen and androgen receptor levels. Johnny has already addressed the other major flaws in your argument.

Children have not been using shampoo long enough. Wait till their late teens.

LOL!

 

[Guest]

Baldness in women is far less common than it is in men. Considering the amount of shampoo that they use relative to men, they should have HIGHER rates of hairloss.

And your line about women being more "genetically predisposed" to retain hair, although true, does not support your argument, it actually proves genetics as the cause of male pattern baldness even more strongly. Additionally, I checked out your website, and it claims that it is the acidity of shampoo that is causing the hairloss. If this is the case, as both mens and women's hair is both made of the same protein structure, the acidity should affect both equally.

And what of the men who have NO balding or recession? These people use shampoos. If the acidity of shampoo is the culprit, then all males should be losing their hair in the same way.

Lastly, the funny thing is that acid is not harmful to keratin... hair is more susceptible to weakening from alkaline substances, on the complete other end of the ph scale.

You keep coming back with the same tired and impotent responses. Let's hear some science behind your claims.

Why doesn't the shampoo hating cult ever respond to you G?

 

[Cutsinger is God]

Baldness in women is far less common than it is in men. Considering the amount of shampoo that they use relative to men, they should have HIGHER rates of hairloss.

And your line about women being more "genetically predisposed" to retain hair, although true, does not support your argument, it actually proves genetics as the cause of male pattern baldness even more strongly. Additionally, I checked out your website, and it claims that it is the acidity of shampoo that is causing the hairloss. If this is the case, as both mens and women's hair is both made of the same protein structure, the acidity should affect both equally.

And what of the men who have NO balding or recession? These people use shampoos. If the acidity of shampoo is the culprit, then all males should be losing their hair in the same way.

Lastly, the funny thing is that acid is not harmful to keratin... hair is more susceptible to weakening from alkaline substances, on the complete other end of the ph scale.

You keep coming back with the same tired and impotent responses. Let's hear some science behind your claims.

Why doesn't the shampoo hating cult ever respond to you G?

If you are referring to me or Dirty David Lee, I can't speak for David but I have answered his Mr Savalas' questions about three or four times already. This guy just keeps asking the same questions over and over and over and over and over again I don't even read what he says anymore. It's like a broken record.

I'll say it again. It is in my opinion that you people are all wrong. Shampoo is the cause of most hairloss. Others are disease, starvation, stress and insects/demodex mites etc. but most of the general balding population are suffering from balding due to over use of shampoo. If you morons ask for evidence one more time I swear I am going to leave. Please just knock it off with the questions and read Get It Back. Lawrence answers every possible question one might have regarding shampoos and soap and why they are causing everyone to go bald. I am sorry to get upset but all you people are like a swarm of bees it's really annoying.

 

[Pondle]

I'll say it again. It is in my opinion that you people are all wrong. Shampoo is the cause of most hairloss.

Man, this is bullcrap. Where's the data to back up your claims? Oh that's right, there is NONE. Zero. Nada. Nought. Absolutely zilch.

We've refuted your ludricrous theory time and time again, yet you still come back for more. :roll:

If you morons ask for evidence one more time I swear I am going to leave. Please just knock it off with the questions and read Get It Back. Lawrence answers every possible question one might have regarding shampoos and soap and why they are causing everyone to go bald. I am sorry to get upset but all you people are like a swarm of bees it's really annoying.

For "morons" read "rational people who look for scientific evidence, as opposed to irrational people who believe a random weird theory from some guy on the net". ROTFL

 

[Cutsinger is God]

I'll say it again. It is in my opinion that you people are all wrong. Shampoo is the cause of most hairloss.

Man, this is bullcrap. Where's the data to back up your claims? Oh that's right, there is NONE. Zero. Nada. Nought. Absolutely zilch.

We've refuted your ludricrous theory time and time again, yet you still come back for more. :roll:

If you morons ask for evidence one more time I swear I am going to leave. Please just knock it off with the questions and read Get It Back. Lawrence answers every possible question one might have regarding shampoos and soap and why they are causing everyone to go bald. I am sorry to get upset but all you people are like a swarm of bees it's really annoying.

For "morons" read "rational people who look for scientific evidence, as opposed to irrational people who believe a random weird theory from some guy on the net". ROTFL

How many fricken times must I say this, the data is at GET IT BACK!! Wake up already!! Good God Poodle, can't you read.

I would like it if you could all sign up there and ask the master himself for evidence but you are all too chicken to do so because you know Lawrence would put you to shame. If you want answers, again, please check out Get It Back. Talk to some of the people there. Did you see Widowspeaks's photos? The guy is regrowing hair out the rear from grunge. It's all there in black and white. The thing is GetIt Back is still gathering information daily on the grunge activities of it's members. In other words, it's still a work in progress. Please go there and ask them personally about their grunge experiences. The only thing you have to lose is more hair if you don't go there and ask. No need to thank me either.

 

[The Gardener]

I am sorry to get upset but all you people are like a swarm of bees it's really annoying.

I don't think you understand the nature of this forum. This forum's "slant" is one that focuses on the science of hairloss. We discuss these issues all the time. I think you have had plenty of time to express your case, it's not like your postings are being deleted, we definitely encourage you to express your ideas... but in exchange on this forum in particular when ideas are presented, the posters like to ask questions, and your theory raises some very big questions.

 

[Pondle]

How many fricken times must I say this, the data is at GET IT BACK!! Wake up already!! Good God Poodle, can't you read.

I would like it if you could all sign up there and ask the master himself for evidence but you are all too chicken to do so because you know Lawrence would put you to shame. If you want answers, again, please check out Get It Back. Talk to some of the people there. Did you see Widowspeaks's photos? The guy is regrowing hair out the rear from grunge. It's all there in black and white. The thing is GetIt Back is still gathering information daily on the grunge activities of it's members. In other words, it's still a work in progress. Please go there and ask them personally about their grunge experiences. The only thing you have to lose is more hair if you don't go there and ask. No need to thank me either.

But you never dealt with the "elephants in the room" which blow your theory out of the water, namely:

1. If shampoo is the cause of hair loss, why doesn't everyone lose their hair, to a similar degree, as a result of using these products?
2. Why did many men lose their hair throughout history before the advent of widespread shampoo use? (Julius Caesar had a combover; baldness is mentioned in the Bible).

 

[Cutsinger is God]

[quote="Cutsinger is God":9104e]I am sorry to get upset but all you people are like a swarm of bees it's really annoying.

I don't think you understand the nature of this forum. This forum's "slant" is one that focuses on the science of hairloss. We discuss these issues all the time. I think you have had plenty of time to express your case, it's not like your postings are being deleted, we definitely encourage you to express your ideas... but in exchange on this forum in particular when ideas are presented, the posters like to ask questions, and your theory raises some very big questions.[/quote:9104e]

I know the posters like to ask questions but please remember this is not my theory, this is Lawrence Cutsinger's theory. I am just a follower of his teachings and have no scientific background that's why I tell people to go to GetItBack where hopefully Lawrence will answer the more technical questions you people might have.

Yes, this theory of Lawrence is the direct opposite of the so called scientific side of hairloss where they claim it's genetic but I truely believe Lawrence is right about this and will prove it when you see him on the Oprah Winfrey show within the next year. He said he plans on contacting them for an appearance so obviously the man has much much more hair than his latest July photos.