S Foote. said:
Listen very carefully, "ALL" normal cells respond to the contact inhibition of cell multiplication. Cancer cells have "LOST" their response to contact inhibition, and thats "WHY" they can invade other tissues!
This statement is untrue. Not true at all. In fact, it's stupid. Cancer cells are able to invade other tissues due to their ability to produce extracellular matrix digesting proteins. Contact receptors are gained in order for them to seed other tissue sites. Contact inhibition does not apply here as contact inhibition kills cells through the FasL system or intracellular signaling.
Growing anagen follicle cells are not "dead" and they will stop growing if there is a certain degree of resistence to this from surrounding tissues, though normal contact inhibition. Anagen follicle size determines the amount of hair produced by that follicle.
^^^^I don't recall anyone saying that. Don't be silly.
This is all basic stuff! :roll:
No, contact inhibition requires the binding of signaling molecules, whether it be a ligand or a growth receptor inhibitor. The hair shaft itself has neither. Transplantation of hair follicles requires immunosuppresion of the area of the transplant unless it's that individuals own hair.
If you think it does, prove it with an in vivo study clearly demonstrating both the molecule and its downstream effects when it comes to the molecular process of contact inhibition in the hair follicle. I want the name of the molecule or the name of the receptor and all downstream effects. I've already given you what the scientific community believes. Let's see your science.
You "yourself" are claiming that fibrosis forming around follicles is preventing them from enlarging. So how do you think that could happen? Why don't the growing follicles just "force" their way through this tough fibrose tissue?
Again, you don't understand fibrosis of tissues. Fibrotic tissue is dense and the collagen that makes it up is even denser. There are numerous types of collagen. Nothing can go through collagen. That's why it's part of the extracellular matrix. Type one collagen is what makes up the majority of bone and type two makes up the majority of cartilage. I don't think you could get hair growing through collagen even if you wanted to.
It's called normal contact inhibition of cell multiplication :wink:
No, it isn't. There is no hyperplasia of any cell within the follicle and the hair shaft itself is not alive to cause inhibition. This argument fails. If you believe that their is hyperplasia of any cell population in the hair follicle give me histological evidence of such.
If your ill informed statement above is based on a "genuine" doctors training (which i now doubt very much), God help your patients :roll:
<<snip<<Now>No, wrong All hair follicles have the exact same genetic programming just as all cells in the human body other than gametes have the same genetic programming. Gene regulation is the only means the body has of altering the programming of individual cells. Methylation and demethylation of specific DNA sequences along with the use of silencers, enhancers, and transcription factors.
Thats the basics of the current theory, as most people understand it. Is this what you believe?
Of course this is what I believe. It's the correct theory and if you don't believe it, then email one of the people with a DOCTORATE degree and ask them yourself.
In my debates with Bryan Shelton about the in-vitro studies (at least one of which you have referenced), i argued that any conclusions reached were unsafe for a number of reasons.
Bryan is on the record as insisting that these in-vitro studies prove the direct growth suppresion of male pattern baldness cells through TGF beta-1.
But it seems you don't agree with Bryan?
I do not agree with Bryan that the mediator is TGF beta-1. It is the cellular processes that occur downstream of TGF beta-1 binding that cuases suppression of hair growth.
You claimed that it was necessary for an immunue system presence for TGF beta-1 to inhibit follicle growth, and you claimed this was why male pattern baldness follicles re-grew in that mouse study. -->No, this is why I claim hair has began growing on my own head since I began taking curcumin. It's also why people who take TNF-alpha inhibitors experience hair regrowth. Both cause cellular apoptosis and fibrosis.
There is also no immune presence in the in-vitro studies where TGF beta-1 apparenty "directly" suppressed male pattern baldness cell growth. So are you saying the in-vitro tests are not a true test of the androgen effect on follicles as Bryan tries to claim?
It is important that you make your position "VERY" clear on this!
S Foote.