Theory: male pattern baldness = Evolution to protect from prostate cancer?

[DonaldAnderson]

I was wondering why some nationalities have less hair loss than others. It let me to a seach about climate and male pattern baldness and I saw this theory.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17910907

Link between prostate cancer and nationalities

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090429501012626

I found that African American men had a higher rate of prostate cancer so it kind of made me doubt that. Has anyone found any studies relating to this?

 

[Chris87]

I was wondering why some nationalities have less hair loss than others. It let me to a seach about climate and male pattern baldness and I saw this theory.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17910907

Link between prostate cancer and nationalities

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090429501012626

I found that African American men had a higher rate of prostate cancer so it kind of made me doubt that. Has anyone found any studies relating to this?

The theory makes no sense to me at all. Also..its just a thought some guy had. There are lots of people with whacky "theories" about balding...you can read a lot of them on this forum. This is by no means a study or anything.

Also he says

Androgenic alopecia affects populations adapted to colder climate, and individuals at an age and hormonal status susceptible to prostate cancer

This makes no sense people who live in all climates go bald. Also..tons of really young guys who are no where near the age of concern for prostate cancer get male pattern baldness. Furthermore..the surface of the head is pretty small compared to the rest of the body. There is plenty of skin to absorb UV rays..why would the body need to get rid of hair to do this?

I mean I could pose a thousand other points why this sounds ridiculous but..i think you get the point...it seems like a really half baked theory.

 

[kc444]

That is very interesting! I've thought about this too, but I thought it might be Vitamin D or something. People in colder climates learned to wear clothes, so most of their body would no longer be exposed to sunlight. Prostate cancer would make more sense since both only affect men.

The prostate cancer theory predicts that African men living in America would experience it at a higher rate. African Americans evolved to live in a hot climate with lots of UV exposure, but they are now living in a mixed climate with less exposure. Their body is not adapted.

The only issue I can think of is the fact that prostate cancer almost exclusively affects men over 40, and we would be more susceptible to it now because we go outside less. Edit: Actually, I looked up early human life expectancy. While it is technically in the mids 30s for most of history, people who made it to puberty were expected to live until their mid 50s. Since men still have sex at that age, it is plausible that prostate cancer happened early enough to have an effect on reproduction.

 

[kc444]

I was wondering why some nationalities have less hair loss than others. It let me to a seach about climate and male pattern baldness and I saw this theory.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17910907

Link between prostate cancer and nationalities

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090429501012626

I found that African American men had a higher rate of prostate cancer so it kind of made me doubt that. Has anyone found any studies relating to this?

The theory makes no sense to me at all. Also..its just a thought some guy had. There are lots of people with whacky "theories" about balding...you can read a lot of them on this forum. This is by no means a study or anything.

Also he says

Androgenic alopecia affects populations adapted to colder climate, and individuals at an age and hormonal status susceptible to prostate cancer

This makes no sense people who live in all climates go bald. Also..tons of really young guys who are no where near the age of concern for prostate cancer get male pattern baldness. Furthermore..the surface of the head is pretty small compared to the rest of the body. There is plenty of skin to absorb UV rays..why would the body need to get rid of hair to do this?

I mean I could pose a thousand other points why this sounds ridiculous but..i think you get the point...it seems like a really half baked theory.

Evolution is much less complex than you're giving it credit for. It's all about simple genetic variations. Maybe people in hot climates do go bald, but it tells us something if the rate of frequency of hair loss is significantly higher in colder climates. male pattern baldness wasn't tailor made for people living in colder climates, but it became more prevalent when those people benefited from it.

Younger guys may get it because the protection occurs over time. You can't send someone to a tanning bed once they get prostate cancer and expect them to be cured just as you wouldn't expect a smoker who was about to get lung cancer to be protected if they stopped smoking a day earlier. The effect is probably cumulative. Or.. it could just be that evolution had no other mechanism to cause hair loss other than DHT. Hair follicles already have DHT receptors (body hair, etc.), so the foundation was already in place. Other than puberty, there are no big changes that could really trigger something like that. It's like asking why babies have genitals when they can't have sex anyway.. it was just easier I guess.

The head is small, but not when you're wearing clothes. It's also the most exposed part of the body when the sun is out. It probably takes in more UV light than other parts of the body relative to its size.

..which brings me to the question of the horseshoe. Why that shape? It would probably be easier to make all follicles sensitive to DHT rather than just some of them. This may actually be a half-baked theory, but it sounds reasonable enough. Maybe it's because the hair on the sides and back of the head offer cushioning for sleeping and were better off left in tact so the people didn't wake up every time they moved their head in the middle of the night. :dunno:

 

[Bet24]

The horseshoe pattern... why that shape?

Well, I will ask you this: Why do men have beard and moustache?

 

[Chris87]

Cool so...at the first signs of hairloss..we could just go tanning on a weekly basis that way our body would be like "got enough UVs...we can keep the hair"

This is just some guys random theory that he made up. There is nothing to back it

Its like if I said "I believe male pattern baldness is a genetic solution to people living in very hot climates. You see, people who live in hot climates are more susceptible to heat stroke, dehydration, and other problems caused by high temperatures. male pattern baldness is nature's way of assuring that people who live in hot climates, or people who regularly participate in activities that raise their body temperature, are able to properly cool themselves. By removing the hair from their heads, people are more easily able to expel heat, therefor reducing their risk of heat related illness"

:jackit:

 

[Thom]

That would be some quick evolution...with a rise in the last 100 years. I'd say our dependency on more chemicals in food and water is a contribution....meaning it may aggravate people predisposed to the male pattern baldness gene causing balding sooner than in life rather than later. Just an un-educated theory though.

 

[s.a.f]

Cool so...at the first signs of hairloss..we could just go tanning on a weekly basis that way our body would be like "got enough UVs...we can keep the hair"

This is just some guys random theory that he made up. There is nothing to back it

Its like if I said "I believe male pattern baldness is a genetic solution to people living in very hot climates. You see, people who live in hot climates are more susceptible to heat stroke, dehydration, and other problems caused by high temperatures. male pattern baldness is nature's way of assuring that people who live in hot climates, or people who regularly participate in activities that raise their body temperature, are able to properly cool themselves. By removing the hair from their heads, people are more easily able to expel heat, therefor reducing their risk of heat related illness"

:jackit:

:agree: Yes people need to understand that evolutionary changes happen over the course of 1000's of generations.

Thats why you're basicly f**ked if you're born with these m.p.b genes. Trying to combat it with diet and lifestyle changes is futile.

 

[DonaldAnderson]

I was wondering why some nationalities have less hair loss than others. It let me to a seach about climate and male pattern baldness and I saw this theory.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17910907

Link between prostate cancer and nationalities

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090429501012626

I found that African American men had a higher rate of prostate cancer so it kind of made me doubt that. Has anyone found any studies relating to this?

The theory makes no sense to me at all. Also..its just a thought some guy had. There are lots of people with whacky "theories" about balding...you can read a lot of them on this forum. This is by no means a study or anything.

Also he says

Androgenic alopecia affects populations adapted to colder climate, and individuals at an age and hormonal status susceptible to prostate cancer

This makes no sense people who live in all climates go bald. Also..tons of really young guys who are no where near the age of concern for prostate cancer get male pattern baldness. Furthermore..the surface of the head is pretty small compared to the rest of the body. There is plenty of skin to absorb UV rays..why would the body need to get rid of hair to do this?

I mean I could pose a thousand other points why this sounds ridiculous but..i think you get the point...it seems like a really half baked theory.

Well I did not call it a study. It is a theory of course and yeah it may be halfbaked. I was seeing if you guys have found any studies.Thanks.

 

[DonaldAnderson]

..which brings me to the question of the horseshoe. Why that shape? It would probably be easier to make all follicles sensitive to DHT rather than just some of them. This may actually be a half-baked theory, but it sounds reasonable enough. Maybe it's because the hair on the sides and back of the head offer cushioning for sleeping and were better off left in tact so the people didn't wake up every time they moved their head in the middle of the night. :dunno:

Haha good point. We never sleep with the top of our head on the surface.

 

[DonaldAnderson]

This is just some guys random theory that he made up. There is nothing to back it

Again, I stated it was theory. I created this topic to see if anybody knew any evidence or studies to support it.

Someone also theorized that male pattern baldness has been around for a long while. Because evolution takes 1000s of years like you guys have said. But our life expectancy has increased dramatically making male pattern baldness more common.

 

[armandein]

..which brings me to the question of the horseshoe. Why that shape? It would probably be easier to make all follicles sensitive to DHT rather than just some of them. This may actually be a half-baked theory, but it sounds reasonable enough. Maybe it's because the hair on the sides and back of the head offer cushioning for sleeping and were better off left in tact so the people didn't wake up every time they moved their head in the middle of the night. :dunno:

Haha good point. We never sleep with the top of our head on the surface.

www.againstalopeciaandbaldness.com

Hair lenght and the head surface in contact with the pillow avoid problems with sebum