Why I Don't Believe In Jak & Other Fairytales

[That Guy]

More times than I can count, I've had the debate with people on here about why I feel JAK and many other developing topicals are not relevant to Androgenetic Alopecia. So, to spare myself the debate further, I'll just link them here so they can read this little time capsule.

There two things that are relevant to a functional cure for male & female pattern baldness: The ability to stop and reverse the miniaturization process and the ability to grow hair where non previously existed.

As such, when reading a new study about a developing technology, I ask myself two questions about what I've just read:

• Can it, or is there sufficient evidence to suggest it will: Halt and/or reverse the miniaturization of your hair?

• Can it, or is there sufficient evidence to suggest it will: Grow hair in skin where hair never grew at all?

If the answer to these questions is "no", then it's not worth our time. You can search and read studies all night long, dating back decades, about things that caused hair to grow in mice and sh*t and they never went anywhere because they failed to give a "yes" to either of my questions.

It doesn't matter if we can figure out what genes are involved and turn them off, it doesn't matter if there is an immune component to Androgenetic Alopecia and it doesn't matter that some JAKass at Aclaris claims "topical JAKs totally work for Androgenetic Alopecia" when he has no evidence aside from a video explanation using mouse subjects who still have normal follicles in their skin. You don't.

I'd give almost anything to be proven wrong and if JAKs or some other topical was proven to be a cure, you know I'd get a vat of it and go bobbing for apples in that b**ch.

But until then...

 

[Royaume]

Am I missing something? I thought that you are going to give reasons why you think that JAKs are not working...

You only bring up questions. Of course your questions make sense and everyone is curious about the answers but it's clear that nobody besides Aclaris and Christiano knows to what extent it works on Androgenetic Alopecia.

Honestly, I do also think that jaks might not work well on areas which are slick bald for many years but many of us are diffuse thinners and I think even Dr. Brotzu said that all alopecias have something in common (it was something about blood vessels, not enough blood etc. cannot explain it because I have to look it up again).

What we definitely know so far is that Jak inhibitors affect the hair cycle directly and kicks those hair follicles in Anagen very fast and we know that topical jaks work on Androgenetic Alopecia. What we don't know and what we don't have is evidence and to what extent are these jaks working?

2 days left... I have the feeling that Neal Walker give us a very exciting update von jak inhibitors on Androgenetic Alopecia. It was exactly a year
ago where he made the statement on the same Jefferies Health Conference, that topical jak DOES work on Androgenetic Alopecia.

Aclaris knows where the money flows... so I guess they do everything they can to push these trials forward and make billions of dollars.

 

[Grasshüpfer]

There are maybe 200 things that can go wrong when growing hair. One of those things is what is happening in male pattern baldness.

Now they discover new things that can go wrong in mice and every time they claim that this is exactly what's going on in male pattern baldness.
Only to find out later that - of course - it's not.

So far I even doubt that the mechanism that is broken in male pattern baldness is even existing in mice at all.

So yeah, Tsuji for the win.

 

[Noble-OnHigh]

Including brotzu lotion? @That Guy

 

[Agent]

Tsuji truly sounds like it could be teh cure but I dont see it happening anywhere near 2020.

 

[plisk]

how is it JAKs dont meet your 2nd criteria?

my understanding was that the hype behind them was the phenomena of spontaneous regrowth in human patients, by effect of serendipity instead of purposeful use of JAKs for hair growth. Was this not the catalyst for investigation?

 

[FootyStar]

While JAK inhibitors may be a fairy tale for those with Androgenetic Alopecia, it may not be for those with severe Areata like myself. I think Tsuji is holds the ultimate answer for curing Androgenetic Alopecia, while Aclaris is currently the best we have in terms of treating Areata (along with possibly Brotzu).

Can't wait to get some JAK inhibs without breaking bank.

 

[NewUser]

Now they discover new things that can go wrong in mice and every time they claim that this is exactly what's going on in male pattern baldness.
Only to find out later that - of course - it's not.

So far I even doubt that the mechanism that is broken in male pattern baldness is even existing in mice at all.

What if there exists a mouse model for Androgenetic Alopecia(transgenic mice engineered to produce high levels of 5alpha-dihydrotestosterone), and it still hasn't helped solve the paradox of "DHT sensitivity" ?

I can't say anything about jakinibs until the science is done.

 

[That Guy]

Am I missing something? I thought that you are going to give reasons why you think that JAKs are not working...

You only bring up questions. Of course your questions make sense and everyone is curious about the answers but it's clear that nobody besides Aclaris and Christiano knows to what extent it works on Androgenetic Alopecia.

Honestly, I do also think that jaks might not work well on areas which are slick bald for many years but many of us are diffuse thinners and I think even Dr. Brotzu said that all alopecias have something in common (it was something about blood vessels, not enough blood etc. cannot explain it because I have to look it up again).

What we definitely know so far is that Jak inhibitors affect the hair cycle directly and kicks those hair follicles in Anagen very fast and we know that topical jaks work on Androgenetic Alopecia.

Saying "Jaks works for Androgenetic Alopecia" is a vague claim. In what way do they work? Can they actually reverse baldness or just "help" it?

The reason I don't believe in JAK is because thus far, it's failed to provide a positive answer to either of my criteria.

There are maybe 200 things that can go wrong when growing hair. One of those things is what is happening in male pattern baldness.

Now they discover new things that can go wrong in mice and every time they claim that this is exactly what's going on in male pattern baldness.
Only to find out later that - of course - it's not.

So far I even doubt that the mechanism that is broken in male pattern baldness is even existing in mice at all.

So yeah, Tsuji for the win.

This is exactly the point. The mice don't have Androgenetic Alopecia so claiming that because some molecule or whatever caused their hair to grow — even though they still had healthy follicles, just in the "off position" — may be a cure for Androgenetic Alopecia is ridiculous.

Including brotzu lotion? @That Guy

Brotzu's lotion, as I've said before, has potential to be the last worthwhile topical for Androgenetic Alopecia because its apparent method action satisfies question 1. We know that anti androgens can preserve hair and that vasodilation helps it grow.

how is it JAKs dont meet your 2nd criteria?

my understanding was that the hype behind them was the phenomena of spontaneous regrowth in human patients, by effect of serendipity instead of purposeful use of JAKs for hair growth. Was this not the catalyst for investigation?

Because there is no evidence that it grows hair where none existed and nothing to indicate it can prevent male pattern baldness and currently, no reason to believe it can.

The only human studies I'm aware of regarding JAK were in people with immune problems, most famously that guy who had AA but when it grew back, still had Androgenetic Alopecia but everyone is convinced that a topical application is somehow going to solve this problem just because Aclaris says so even though for Androgenetic Alopecia it's still pre-clinical, casting doubt on human tests for this purpose. At this point, the human studies they've done are like mouse studies for they still have follicles so it doesn't matter unless you have AA.

Something like what Tsuji, TissUse, Hairclone or L'Oreal are working on would enable you to take that hair, implant it into the palm of your hand and watch it grow — that is a cure.

 

[H]

I lol'd when I read this title

 

[Omega2327]

Tsuji truly sounds like it could be teh cure but I dont see it happening anywhere near 2020.

Oh and what makes you so sure about that?

 

[GiveMeAccessToMyAccount]

I have both AA and male pattern baldness, so i'm excited if it works for either hair loss type. One hair loss eliminated for me is one step closer to normalcy.

 

[hanginginthewire]

 

[That Guy]

I have both AA and male pattern baldness, so i'm excited if it works for either hair loss type. One hair loss eliminated for me is one step closer to normalcy.

and that's fantastic: it's great that they work well for AA

but what I'm saying is that getting our hopes up for Androgenetic Alopecia is illogical and likely just going to lead to mass disappointment.

 

[GiveMeAccessToMyAccount]

and that's fantastic: it's great that they work well for AA

but what I'm saying is that getting our hopes up for Androgenetic Alopecia is illogical and likely just going to lead to mass disappointment.

Oh yeah, I agree with you. I was just giving my 2 cents about all these upcoming drugs that may or may not work for alopecia areata and male pattern baldness. You are right, it's likely that JAK's won't work for male pattern baldness. I would be happy if it works 100% to bring back my lost patches of hair though, and brings back my lost pigment from vitiligo, which I also have. 2 evil diseases down, 1 more to go.