For bryan and Foote.

[S Foote.]

It seems that most hairloss sites assume that enlarged sebaceous glands are present in balding scalp, but I do pubmed type searches and dont see clinicals on it, it just seems that its a "generally accepted notion" in the hairloss community...........

Try using different terms in you query, such as "hypertrophy" instead of "enlargement". Browse or search the MeSH database for ideas, and to see how things are indexed. Also search for conditions in which hypersecretion of sebum is known to be present.

New studies are generally not conducted to examine relationships that have been already conclusively demonstrated. The relationship is mentioned in many dermatologic textbooks; they have references.

Then why dont you post some of these "references" that refute the "specific" point i raised, instead of this "nudge nudge wink wink" nonsense?

Re-read my posts if you still don't understand my point!

Concerning HM, hair follicles transplanted using current methods maintain their original growth characteristics, including lack of susceptibility to androgens. Obviously "fluid pressure" is not restricting their growth, and there is no reason to think that it would do so in the case of HM implanted follicles, either. Ask Stephen what he thinks about that if you're in the mood for humor.

You really ought to try to keep up on what has been debated in previous threads Dave!

The only follicles transplanted to the bald area that survive long term, are those that had a healing process occour very close by after transplantation.. This means fibrose tissue formation around these transplanted large anagen follicles.

If you want to debate the transplantation issue, first do a search for "transplant doughnutting". Then i'll tell you what is so obviously wrong in the transplant industries "explaination" for this continued hair loss in larger grafts :wink:

Hm will have to deal with the same scalp conditions as conventional grafts!

S Foote.

 

[michael barry]

Stephen,

Thought you'd get a kick out of this article http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... =1&c=yhere


Isolagen is doing trials now. The poster Baccy over at hairsite was a trialist. He said he was injected 100 times after a topical anaesthetic was rubbed on his face and head. He said it hurt like hell and he looks like he has been beaten up. Hope the junk works.

By the way.....Anderans is now saying that one will need "booster" shots of stem cells every few years. Im pissed. They are supposed to be donor area stem cells, SO WHAT IS UP WITH THAT. If the original cost is 8-12K? How much would the "booster" shots be? This sucks man, turns me off on the whole process. I dont trust Larry Lee Bosley at ALL. Something is quite fishy about that.

 

[Dave001]

You really ought to try to keep up on what has been debated in previous threads Dave!

Why would I want to do that?

The only follicles transplanted to the bald area that survive long term, are those that had a healing process occour very close by after transplantation..

"those that had a healing process occour very close by after transplantation"? WTF? That means nothing. Do you even know the meaning of what you intend to communicate? If so, consider using appropriate terminology.

 

[S Foote.]

Stephen,

Thought you'd get a kick out of this article http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... =1&c=yhere


Isolagen is doing trials now. The poster Baccy over at hairsite was a trialist. He said he was injected 100 times after a topical anaesthetic was rubbed on his face and head. He said it hurt like hell and he looks like he has been beaten up. Hope the junk works.

By the way.....Anderans is now saying that one will need "booster" shots of stem cells every few years. Im pissed. They are supposed to be donor area stem cells, SO WHAT IS UP WITH THAT. If the original cost is 8-12K? How much would the "booster" shots be? This sucks man, turns me off on the whole process. I dont trust Larry Lee Bosley at ALL. Something is quite fishy about that.

Thanks for the link Michael, i think it was the Victorian era when the first "electro" helmet for hair loss was advertised!

Here's another link relevant to the current lasers for hair loss issue.

http://www.centurion-systems.co.uk/effectsoflaser.htm

The effects claimed quote:

1) ACCELERATED TISSUE REPAIR
(2) RAPID FORMATION OF COLLAGEN
(3) BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON NERVE CELLS & THE PRODUCTION OF B-ENDORPHINS
(4) ACCELERATED LYMPHATIC SYSTEM ACTIVITY & REDUCTION IN EDEMA
(5) FORMATION OF NEW CAPILLARIES & INCREASED BLOOD FLOW

I would be very carefull about any claims made for earlyHM, particularly a version claimed to need "booster" shots?

Kinda goes against the whole point of a "permanant" fix supposed to be in the scope of HM?

S Foote.

 

[S Foote.]

You really ought to try to keep up on what has been debated in previous threads Dave!

Why would I want to do that?

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/discussions ... g+theories[/url]

S Foote.

 

[hairwegoagain]

I'm really, really gassy right now. FYI.

 

[michael barry]

http://www.cjad.com/content/content_edi ... ldness.pdf

That info was terrific in adding to my understanding of baldness. It can happen so quick. In the article one twin who had been castrated and had a full head of hair was visited by his bald twin brother at a hospital. Dr. James Hamilton noted this, and got permission to inject the twin with hair with testosterone. He went bald IN SIX PHUCKING MONTHS.

Ive read some theories that cutting your hair, shampoo, "mental tension", sleeping with big pillows, etc. cause hairloss. All that do not identify DHT as the progenitor either directly or indirectly are bunk. Male hormones definitely cause hairloss.

To be honest, the only two plausible alternative explanations of hairloss were an Isolagen Dr's (forget her name, Olga somethingeuropean) thought that DHT got a layer of fat to dissapate on your scalp and your hair needed these fatty acids and signals they send for regrworth and the other is Stephen's that DHT induces your lympatic pumps to speed up, pumping the scalp full of fluid which has too much pressure built up to allow follicles to enlarge. Its rather difficult to see how either could happen so quickly, but Im not a biologist.

Im going to post this info in some various places so newbies dont get caught up in scams that tell them they just need more zinc or something.

 

[Bryan]

http://www.cjad.com/content/content_editable/personality_pages/TheChemistryofBaldness.pdf

That info was terrific in adding to my understanding of baldness. It can happen so quick. In the article one twin who had been castrated and had a full head of hair was visited by his bald twin brother at a hospital. Dr. James Hamilton noted this, and got permission to inject the twin with hair with testosterone. He went bald IN SIX PHUCKING MONTHS.

I hate to be a wet blanket here, but I have to point out that I have NEVER EVER been able to track down the source of that rumor about the so-called "Twin Experiment". It may be apocryphal.

Bryan

 

[michael barry]

Bryan,

I was able to find this http://www.italway.it/associazioni/sitr ... ilton.html

You know man, even if the six months was ancedotal or has become exaggerated over the years, the info about the acne, muscle growth, sex drive, and baldness in the article enough is fascinating.

Bryan, I really believe that if a young fella, just noticing thinning, got on a great internal/external anti-androgen regimine in time.....he'd keep his hair for a LONG time. Even something like finasteride/spironolactone twice/revivogen once a day with nizoral would proboably work for many many years. I honestly think the key is acting before the immune system steps in.........so many factors step in at that time, that even if you are using prox-n and NANO......youre fighting a rear-guard action at that point.

Ive wondered, proboably in vain and hopefully, that blocking andro receptors for many years might make the immune system a little less interested in the follicle. Aplunk had a great post on fluridil and how it increased anagen hairs quite a bit in a little study I read earlier in the day. It appears to work. A guy who had time to do spironolactone all over the head before/after work and right before bed could possibly stop most androgen transcription all over his head. Genhair.com has spironolactone at a pretty good price. I wonder if those guys put a fragrant additive to it though.........dont think I could deal with that smell (from what Ive heard). Thanks for the post by the way.

You really ought to start your own website Bryan. You could make alot of money with all you know about hair man......no kidding.

 

[sublime]

unk:

 

[Bryan]

You know man, even if the six months was ancedotal or has become exaggerated over the years, the info about the acne, muscle growth, sex drive, and baldness in the article enough is fascinating.

Actually, I don't even have any real evidence that the "Twin Study" happened AT ALL. It all seems to be based on a false attribution by a certain famous doctor. Just for the sheer entertainment value, and to demonstrate that you can't ALWAYS trust even what doctors say, let me describe to you what I went through, just in an effort to find out more about the elusive "Twin Study":

First I noticed references to it in several different medical journal articles and studies; for example, a good recent example is Dr. David Whiting's excellent review article entitled "Male pattern balding: current understanding". Whiting mentions the "Twin Study", and discusses it briefly. As a reference for it, he cites an article written by Dr. Norman Orentrich along about 1980 or so, with a title something like "The biology of hair growth". So I go get THAT article by Orentreich, because I want to read all about the famous "Twin Study". Orentreic discusses it briefly, and as a reference for it, he in turn cites a specific article written by James Hamilton in the 1940's. So I go get THAT article, but then I hit a dead-end. After reading the entire study from front to back, I see that THERE IS NO MENTION WHATSOEVER OF ANY "TWIN STUDY". In fact, the word "twin" doesn't even appear anywhere in the text.

Every mention I've ever seen of the "Twin Study" cites Orentreich as the source, but Orentreich's own attribution is INCORRECT. The trail goes cold at that point. Was Orentreich DRUNK when he wrote that??

For what it's worth, I've also read several other Hamilton studies, but there's no mention of any "Twin Study" in any of them, either. So even doctors and scientists occasionally get their sources and references fouled-up.

You really ought to start your own website Bryan. You could make alot of money with all you know about hair man......no kidding.

Heh. Thanks for the suggestion. It's something to think about! :wink:

Bryan

 

[techprof]

or perhaps HairLossTalk.com can devote a link/page for Bryan. Bryan can write facts about hairloss and discuss the strength and weeknesses of all the products in his view.

 

[michael barry]

http://www.google.com/search?hair loss=en&lr=& ... tnG=Search


If thats a wive's tale, its certianly been oft-repeated. It may be so though Bryan. If anybody could have tracked it down, you could.

It really does just repeat what the ancient Greeks stated though. Hippocrates noted eunuchs didnt bald, devlop deep voices, male characteristics no matter what their family history. Kevin McElwee has some stuff on that over at Keratin.com. McElwee sure neglects that site. Discussion is dead as a doornail over there. Im gonna take a posting break. Ive read about this one subject (hair) too much over the past year. By the way, Im a norwood three and holding. Course Im throwing the kitchen sink at it. Propecia, (considering dutas), copper-peptide, a minoxidil-aminexil mix (temporary for three months, then back to minoxidil), nizoral, fluridil. Ive got NANO ordered too. I reason if the big-three plus an anti-androgen topical (fluridil.....have considered switching to revivogen at times because fluridil is so damn dry), nothing will much work. 75$ a month is my limit though.

 

[Dave001]

Every mention I've ever seen of the "Twin Study" cites Orentreich as the source, but Orentreich's own attribution is INCORRECT. The trail goes cold at that point. Was Orentreich DRUNK when he wrote that??

That's awful. Indirect references are very rarely appropriate in formal scientific papers, and they should always be indicated as such by the citation when they are used. If any references to that alleged twin study are to appear in the future, you should send a letter to the journal's editor, and hopefully it would get published and humiliate the author, not to mention encourage proper source validation.

Alternatively, maybe references to that Hamilton study are used by the military to secretly communicate top-secret information.

 

[michael barry]

http://www.oprah.com/tows/slide/200509/ ... _107.jhtml

Thats a pic of a woman who took testosterone to become more manly. She lost her hair. Fascinating how female hormones protect women from baldness isnt it?

 

[sublime]

unk:

 

[Aplunk1]

Funny how you're looking at transgender pics on the internet.

 

[sublime]

unk:

 

[michael barry]

sublime,
Uh-huh......show me one....liar

 

[sublime]

:dunno: