Very Impressive Dermarolling And Minxodil Results - From Tressless

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
Do you have examples of these studies where humans regrew hair from wounding after being burned? There is only the campfire guy as far as I know. I doubt this happens from microneedling and minoxidil. In fact I know it doesn't in my case.
I am talking about that guy and also people theorizing about that.
Anybody contacted studies long term on needling for hair loss?Just on needling,no fina or anything else?I cant find any.
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
I am talking about that guy and also people theorizing about that.
It's certainly possible, but we're talking about the Follica and Dhurat protocols here. I think that campfire guy was on benoxaprofen, which many people grew hair on but is now banned. De novo hair follicle generation is possible, but I don't think we are accomplishing that with what we are doing. I think Pigeon is right that we are only bringing back dormant follicles.
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
It's certainly possible, but we're talking about the Follica and Dhurat protocols here. I think that campfire guy was on benoxaprofen, which many people grew hair on but is now banned. De novo hair follicle generation is possible, but I don't think we are accomplishing that with what we are doing. I think Pigeon is right that we are only bringing back dormant follicles.
I am not arguing this point and who is right or wrong only because needling with min can create subjective opinions.The general consensus is that finasteride or duta works for many people but not needling.It didnt work for me but i have no doubt that works for a few people.
Its time for you now to find the permanent cure .
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
It's certainly possible, but we're talking about the Follica and Dhurat protocols here. I think that campfire guy was on benoxaprofen, which many people grew hair on but is now banned. De novo hair follicle generation is possible, but I don't think we are accomplishing that with what we are doing. I think Pigeon is right that we are only bringing back dormant follicles.
How can we possibly reach a conclusion on that when there are not follow up studies?I n my opinion the DHURAT study was an amateur one with very few subjects,
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
I am not arguing this point and who is right or wrong only because needling with min can create subjective opinions.The general consensus is that finasteride or duta works for many people but not needling.It didnt work for me but i have no doubt that works for a few people.
Its time for you now to find the permanent cure .
I think you may have misunderstood. I didn't mean microneedling didn't work for me, it worked very well. I got tons of new hairs, but they weren't dead follicles. As I'm sure you know the hair follicle usually does not die, even for decades, it just remains dormant, only producing an invisible vellus follicle at best. Even after many decades bald men retain the follicles in their scalp with a healthy population of HFSCs. All I meant was that it didn't grow back hair on a deep scar. We can't draw conclusions from that, but we certainly have no evidence of de novo HF generation in humans. Even campfire guy probably didn't destroy the follicles when he was burned. It seems more likely that what we are doing is only waking up existing follicles, which is all that we need since follicles usually don't die in Androgenetic Alopecia. I'd say Cotsarelis agrees with that assessment since he started researching using SAG and FGF9 to achieve true de novo HF regeneration. There would be no reason to use such a dangerous drug if minoxidil could achieve the same thing.
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
I think you may have misunderstood. I didn't mean microneedling didn't work for me, it worked very well. I got tons of new hairs, but they weren't dead follicles. As I'm sure you know the hair follicle usually does not die, even for decades, it just remains dormant, only producing an invisible vellus follicle at best. Even after many decades bald men retain the follicles in their scalp with a healthy population of HFSCs. All I meant was that it didn't grow back hair on a deep scar. We can't draw conclusions from that, but we certainly have no evidence of de novo HF generation in humans. Even campfire guy probably didn't destroy the follicles when he was burned. It seems more likely that what we are doing is only waking up existing follicles, which is all that we need since follicles usually don't die in Androgenetic Alopecia. I'd say Cotsarelis agrees with that assessment since he started researching using SAG and FGF9 to achieve true de novo HF regeneration. There would be no reason to use such a dangerous drug if minoxidil could achieve the same thing.
When i responded to Solid Snake i told him that he should do it because it might work.If i gave him my opinion based on personal experience i was gonna say no.I didnt.I didnt misunderstand you at all.You gave us a hint that you had results with needling and min. You hit it right on its head when you taiked about Cotsarelis.You hold the man in high regard,I dont But i used to.
Then let me ask you,why it worked for some people but it didn't work for most?(assuming that needling is going to wake up dormant follicles)
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
When i responded to Solid Snake i told him that he should do it because it might work.If i gave him my opinion based on personal experience i was gonna say no.I didnt.I didnt misunderstand you at all.You gave us a hint that you had results with needling and min. You hit it right on its head when you taiked about Cotsarelis.You hold the man in high regard,I dont But i used to.
Then let me ask you,why it worked for some people but it didn't work for most?(assuming that needling is going to wake up dormant follicles)
I don't follow your logic, if it worked by creating new HFs then it should work on everyone, right? I'm not sure that it not working on everyone would lend evidence either for or against de novo HF regeneration. Since you brought it up though, why does finasteride work for some and not for others? I would argue that microneedling works for most. In fact, the trials prove this rather conclusively. There can be many reasons it won't work on some people, higher AR expression, less sulfotransferase in the scalp, age, longer duration of baldness, so a smaller cell number, making it harder to bring them back.

One doesn't have to hold Cotsarelis in high esteem to recognize that he is a respected academic in this field who knows more about microneedling and neogensis than anyone.
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
I don't follow your logic, if it worked by creating new HFs then it should work on everyone, right? I'm not sure that it not working on everyone would lend evidence either for or against de novo HF regeneration. Since you brought it up though, why does finasteride work for some and not for others? I would argue that microneedling works for most. In fact, the trials prove this rather conclusively. There can be many reasons it won't work on some people, higher AR expression, less sulfotransferase in the scalp, age, longer duration of baldness, so a smaller cell number, making it harder to bring them back.

One doesn't have to hold Cotsarelis in high esteem to recognize that he is a respected academic in this field who knows more about microneedling and neogensis than anyone.
Whats so abnormal about my logic?I am not a proponent or opponent of micro needling,I am doing it myself.How can you possibly compare fina and needling?One is a proven drug(I am a user) and the other one came into existence from Dhurat and his dozen subjects.
By your logic an 75 year old man might regrow his hair with needles because his follicles are dormant
Until a few years ago DHT was thought to be the main cause of hair-loss, but its being challenged now.At one of your posts you claimed that we have no cure yet because not enough money is being put into research and pharmaceutical companies will not make enough money by selling a pill that will cure hair loss.I disagree with that.Simply they have so many unknowns into the equation.
When a drug doesn't work after many years of research then you give up or start using excuses.(Cotsarelis)
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
Where is DHT theory being challenged? Everything is downstream of DHT. Literally no respected researcher believes otherwise, only papers out of India which is known for backwards ideas on medicine. If you don't get the analogy with finasteride and my point about how the number of people getting results from microneedling doesn't indicate moa one way or the other then I'm sorry. I don't know how else to explain it. I think we both agree that minoxidil and microneedling is a great treatment regardless of the moa.
As i said before I am not advocating for or against needling,same with fina,but DHT is not the only culprit and absolutely is being challenged.Its even challenged by you(Bayer prolactin.smi). Challenged to me means, is not the only cause.Thats why i said,that there are many unknowns.
On a different note a lot of us are counting on you to find the cure.So keep up the good work
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
As i said before I am not advocating for or against needling,same with fina,but DHT is not the only culprit and absolutely is being challenged.Its even challenged by you(Bayer prolactin.smi). Challenged to me means, is not the only cause.Thats why i said,that there are many unknowns.
On a different note a lot of us are counting on you to find the cure.So keep up the good work
Prolactin is downstream of DHT. male pattern baldness literally can't happen without DHT. It's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt
 

Armando Jose

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
975
male pattern baldness literally can't happen without DHT
no, all hairs need DHT to grow. body hair is an example.
scalp hairs have DHT a lot of years before puberty, sebaceous gland need this hormone to make sebum.
Till scientists dont take the idea never we shall advance.....
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
To be fair he is just not using the right words. From his comment I understand that he's saying that there are other factors taking place, you can argument that it's a downstream effect, but prolactin currently remains to be an additional pathway to be addressed without necessarily altering DHT. I would also consider that the (mainstream) theory has been challenged, not as in being proven wrong but rather incomplete, lacking understanding in all the processes involved and also specially lacking the ability to provide a satisfactory solution.
It has always been known that it's incomplete. I don't think anyone ever thought DHT was the only culprit, there are hundreds of genes involved.
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
It has always been known that it's incomplete. I don't think anyone ever thought DHT was the only culprit, there are hundreds of genes involved.
I have to work for a living,so i cant stay here responding to you.I wish i could.You go on the offensive and then on the defensive.It pays to be humble,obviously you dont know that.Humility is a big thing which obviously you don't know.You re changing your tune now about DHT.My expertise is at a different major not biology as you noticed.But i have some common sense knowledge about hair loss and if i wanna know something all i have to do ask a member and i ll have an answer in a minute.I just took a quick look at the Bayer thread and i could nt get the terms right,as the dog pointed out.No need to get smart or arrogant.I am not competing with you in anything,especially in hair loss theory where i consider you to be an expert.Good luck my brother.
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
I have to work for a living,so i cant stay here responding to you.I wish i could.You go on the offensive and then on the defensive.It pays to be humble,obviously you dont know that.Humility is a big thing which obviously you don't know.You re changing your tune now about DHT.My expertise is at a different major not biology as you noticed.But i have some common sense knowledge about hair loss and if i wanna know something all i have to do ask a member and i ll have an answer in a minute.I just took a quick look at the Bayer thread and i could nt get the terms right,as the dog pointed out.No need to get smart or arrogant.I am not competing with you in anything,especially in hair loss theory where i consider you to be an expert.Good luck my brother.
Wtf? I think I should just stop posting here as nuanced discource appears to be misunderstood for something else. I didn't mean to be insulting, I'm just giving my opinion on the subject.
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
4,582
Last response of the day.Its one thing to give your opinion and its very different to force you opinion .Pigeon try to be your own man
It's called back and forth discussion bro. Calm down. You can disagree all you want, I was just making sure we were understanding each other's positions
 

300

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
420
Why don't you just let it go Bro?What makes you think i wasn't calm?Its funny i thought the same thing about you ,that you were getting uncomfortable.You lectured me about DHT,etc and now you re gonna lecture me about discussion?A discussion you aiways try to dominate?Dont tell me, nobody told you that before. "I disagree with you?'Who can possibly disagree with you Bro?Who can possibly challenge you?You think very highly of yourself Bro.Who cares?Really.
 

fashy

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
201
Why don't you just let it go Bro?What makes you think i wasn't calm?Its funny i thought the same thing about you ,that you were getting uncomfortable.You lectured me about DHT,etc and now you re gonna lecture me about discussion?A discussion you aiways try to dominate?Dont tell me, nobody told you that before. "I disagree with you?'Who can possibly disagree with you Bro?Who can possibly challenge you?You think very highly of yourself Bro.Who cares?Really.

 

Micky_007

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
377
no, all hairs need DHT to grow. body hair is an example.
scalp hairs have DHT a lot of years before puberty, sebaceous gland need this hormone to make sebum.
Till scientists dont take the idea never we shall advance.....
Fully agree, DHT is important.
 
Top