Just an interesting article on, you guessed it, DHT and the brain: https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/how-testosterone-may-alter-the-brain-after-exercise/?_r=0 .
Study On Dht, Exercise, And The Brain
- Thread starter tjnpdx
- Start date
-
- Tags
- brain dht exercise testoterone
- Reaction score
- 365
Pretty interesting. It's obvious that our bodies want to make DHT, it just sucks that for bald guys it can wreak havoc on our androgen receptors.
I was thinking what if science is going about finding a cure for hair loss the wrong way? What if we could actually simulate the effects of DHT by taking a synthetic DHT that doesn't have the same negative consequences on our hair follicles? It would function like a vaccine almost.
I dont have a science background so there are probably numerous flaws in my idea, but oh well
.
I was thinking what if science is going about finding a cure for hair loss the wrong way? What if we could actually simulate the effects of DHT by taking a synthetic DHT that doesn't have the same negative consequences on our hair follicles? It would function like a vaccine almost.
I dont have a science background so there are probably numerous flaws in my idea, but oh well
.Well, I think most people take the position that messing with hormones isn't a good idea in the first place. I definitely stand on the side that the story isn't as simple as: DHT causes baldness in genetically predisposed people. I'd find it hard to believe that it's that simple Simplifying like that seems to be a grave injustice to the simplest logic.
Funny thing: I saw a derm yesterday to get a finasteride script, and he immediately bust in the door giving me a speech on genetics. Said finasteride isn't really effective. Proceeded to tell me that he barely ever gets requests to prescribe it. Said he doesn't really follow up on people. Knew nothing of finasteride or minoxidil sheds when starting either of them. He did prescribe it, though. I think everyone has their own ideas as to hair loss (especially ignorant dermatologists). I have confidence in the research being done just beyond the horizon, though!
Funny thing: I saw a derm yesterday to get a finasteride script, and he immediately bust in the door giving me a speech on genetics. Said finasteride isn't really effective. Proceeded to tell me that he barely ever gets requests to prescribe it. Said he doesn't really follow up on people. Knew nothing of finasteride or minoxidil sheds when starting either of them. He did prescribe it, though. I think everyone has their own ideas as to hair loss (especially ignorant dermatologists). I have confidence in the research being done just beyond the horizon, though!
Last edited:
Nothing is ever simple in the human body which is why it takes so long to figure things out. DHT is a huge player in male pattern baldness though I Mean how can anyone even dispute that with the amount of evidence that exists already. Castrated men never go bald what other evidence to support AAs do you really need? its not that simple of course, but its that simple in that it works very well in most cases
This is like saying "I don't believe it's as simple as 'drink too much alcohol ->get your motor skills impaired."
Sure, if you wanna get technical, the biological processes at work in alcohol consumption are much more complicated. But the very basic statement is true enough to get the point across. If you see someone drinking too much then you can assume they will get impaired. If you find someone with alcohol impairment then you can assume they drank too much.
Yes, I would very much like to get technical. The reductionist attitude, especially by dermatologists, leading towards the most basic, run-down explanation of why this ailment effects millions of men is ridiculous. I understand that the science isn't there to give me an explanation, but when it's boiled down to being A + B = C you do the whole process of scientific inquiry an injustice. What about higher risks for prostate cancer? Heart disease/heart attacks? Cholesterol? Ignoring the possible implications of this 'genetic predisposition' because it's easier to say, 'DHT causes baldness in genetically predisposed people,' is absurd.
So if you find a bald guy you can assume DHT caused his hair loss? The difference is the alcohol impairment is pretty obviously due to the drunkard drinking his gin, whereas baldness is incredibly more complicated. Boiling baldness down doesn't really get any point across. By your logic this would also satisfy you: Propecia reduces DHT, therefore, it cures baldness for every man. Glad to see you're still lurking on these forms when you've got the essential parts of the balding process cracked.
Last edited:
Also important to keep in mind that propecia just changes the ratio of testosterone to DHT in your body. It doesn't kill all the DHT in your system and It doesn't produce estrogen or anything weird like that. There's potential for side-effects but its nothing to stress out about. Just stop using it if you definitely feel some negative effects over months of taking it.
How's your time been with it?
Had amazing hair growth after my penis fell off. (kidding)
No side-effects. Yet to reach the point where I can tell if its working.
That's good (about your penis falling off (kidding)). How long have you been on it? Glad to hear about the sides--or lack thereof.
Prostate cancer, heart disease, heart attacks, cholesterol . . . I don't think these things are that hard to figure out.
When researchers study "bald men", they aren't identifying that group by looking for the genetic predisposition alone. They are ID-ing them by the resultant hair loss. So the men they study are liable to skew towards the portion of the baldness-prone population that also has a hormone profile that does more damage as well.
(If you try to find a group of men with thin body-mass-index genes, and you do it by way of just looking at their bodies, then you will end up with a group of men who have thin genes + thinner-than-average eating & exercise habits.)
The same issue would apply for other health issues. Baldness genes hurt hair growth but so does anything that is bad for health in general. Once again, it skews the group of "balding men" being studied towards a group with generally worse health than a truly representative sample of all men with the baldness genes alone.
Okay, fair enough point. The baldness process is indeed more complex than the androgen damage alone.
I'm not sure there is much practical gain to be had from further looking, though. I'm not a fan if Finasteride but fighting the androgen damage is the only thing that has ever done much good on live men.
I also think we will have some real regrowth treatments on the commercial market before we make a lot more big strides forward in understanding the process. It's not a very inspiring research outlook but I think this is probably the truth as of today.