Natwraggie said:Can hair loss be caused by skull expansion?
I know this has been discussed before, but I just really want a yes or no answer... sorry... lol
FSHGLD said:DHT plays a role in bone formation. There's an academic article about this called 'Big Head? Bald Head!' Look it up.
Nene said:That's ridiculous. Men with hair also have DHT so why doesn't their head get bigger? The human skeleton does not grow after a certain age.
Natwraggie said:Nene said:That's ridiculous. Men with hair also have DHT so why doesn't their head get bigger? The human skeleton does not grow after a certain age.
Thanks
Just feels like my head has gotten bigger recentely. Lets hope I am just worrying about nothing.
FSHGLD said:DHT plays a role in bone formation. There's an academic article about this called 'Big Head? Bald Head!' Look it up.
Earlier it states"Medical Hypotheses will publish papers which describe theories, ideas which have a great deal of observational support and some hypotheses where experimental support is yet fragmentary
it (the journal) will publish interesting and important theoretical papers that foster the diversity and debate upon which the scientific process thrives
A redirection of genetic research towards the identification of those genes responsible for skull shape and development would be appropriate, and may reveal the genetic connection to Androgenetic Alopecia including its paternal link.
theShade said:Hair that is transplanted from a 'permenent' zone to a region of the head where hair is balding; remains and does not die off like its neighbours.
Clearly, the mechanism lies in the individual hair follicles; and as such this theory is simple bullshit.
no if skull expansion were the cause & not a genetic predispostion to DHT then all your hair would be affected, not just hair in the horse shoe shape
If skull expansion was the cause then DHT blocking drugs like finasteride would have no effect.
DHT is just one of the many causes of hair loss. The root cause is that the follicles are not getting enough blood/oxygen right? I think skull expansion may cause thinning of the blood vessels and cause the hair follicles in those regions to get less blood. I think skull expansion along with DHT and other variables all play a role in hair loss.no if skull expansion were the cause & not a genetic predispostion to DHT then all your hair would be affected, not just hair in the horse shoe shape
If skull expansion was the cause then DHT blocking drugs like finasteride would have no effect.
Surely it can't be a coincidence that Male Pattern Baldness is mostly concentrated in a region above and immediately surrounding the galea. Skull expansion or contraction of muscles connected to the galea seems to be the most convincing explanation as to why inflammatory factors and 5-AR activity is so high in this region. The notion that HFs are genetically conscripted to be sensitive to DHT in a certain area seems a little outlandish IMO. A lot of people dismiss this theory quickly by pointing to hair transplants but how successful are hair transplants? Anecdotal reports I have read in the past have suggested transplanted hairs do indeed miniaturise years down the line, but there hasn't been a long term study that has documented patient outcomes to verify one way or the other, for the time being the debate rages..
Surely it can't be a coincidence that Male Pattern Baldness is mostly concentrated in a region above and immediately surrounding the galea. Skull expansion or contraction of muscles connected to the galea seems to be the most convincing explanation as to why inflammatory factors and 5-AR activity is so high in this region. The notion that HFs are genetically conscripted to be sensitive to DHT in a certain area seems a little outlandish IMO. A lot of people dismiss this theory quickly by pointing to hair transplants but how successful are hair transplants? Anecdotal reports I have read in the past have suggested transplanted hairs do indeed miniaturise years down the line, but there hasn't been a long term study that has documented patient outcomes to verify one way or the other, for the time being the debate rages..
The first hair transplants were ugly plugs. and sometimes you see older patients who had these primitive hair transplant who go for repair hair transplant. And what do we see more than a decade after? they still have these hair plugs.
secondly look at this post #51 I posted in another thread :
https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...ent-for-mice-found.115828/page-3#post-1697090
so literally 10years after... transplanted hairs on the 1st third are the only ones still holding on and he lost all the native hairs behind.
Honestly that does not disprove the theory. The frontal bone runs from directly on the top of the orbits to the coronal suture at the top of the cranium vault. U wrote that he was NW3A, and his re-balding patterns seem to agree with this. Hair transplanted to just about his natural hairline has again receded, since it was in the affected zone. Anywhere south of that was probably not affected, just as his eyebrows don't thin because they are not in the balding zone.
Or, u can think of it as growth along the coronal suture expanding the cranium forwards and "pushing" the transplanted hair forwards creating a gap that was previously fixed.