Men Who Lose Their Hair At Younger Age Have A Lower Sperm Count, Study Reveals

Saulus

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
641
  • Sperm volume count was nearly 60 per cent lower in men who lost hair
  • Hormonal changes associated with hair loss may adversely affect semen

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-hair-30-lower-sperm-count-study-reveals.html

Bonus:

"In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 99 men (age, 18-55 years; 33 of them assigned to receive 0.5 mg dutasteride, 34 receiving 5 mg finasteride, and the remaining on placebo) for 1 year, the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and self-assessed sexual function (measured per validated questionnaire) decreased during treatment with both 5-α-reductase inhibitors (but returned to baseline during follow-up).[4] Except sperm morphology, all semen parameters are known to be compromised by finasteride. Another observation showed similar findings of decreased semen parameters, which were reversible.

In experimental models, finasteride in vitro caused a significant reduction in the number of spermatogenic cells, diameter of seminiferous tubules, and diameter and thickness of epididymis tubules, although the effects were not seen in vivo. However, in both in vitro and in vivo, the diameter of prostatic tubules decreased significantly."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3205531/
 

BaldyBalderBald

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531
It makes actually sense considering the evolutionary theory
People with genetics flaws are less likely to reproduce (even without all this incel bullshit theories)
Biologically it makes sense, but that's just a Darwin theory
 

UncleMort

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
148
  • Sperm volume count was nearly 60 per cent lower in men who lost hair
  • Hormonal changes associated with hair loss may adversely affect semen
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-hair-30-lower-sperm-count-study-reveals.html

Bonus:

"In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of 99 men (age, 18-55 years; 33 of them assigned to receive 0.5 mg dutasteride, 34 receiving 5 mg finasteride, and the remaining on placebo) for 1 year, the serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and self-assessed sexual function (measured per validated questionnaire) decreased during treatment with both 5-α-reductase inhibitors (but returned to baseline during follow-up).[4] Except sperm morphology, all semen parameters are known to be compromised by finasteride. Another observation showed similar findings of decreased semen parameters, which were reversible.

In experimental models, finasteride in vitro caused a significant reduction in the number of spermatogenic cells, diameter of seminiferous tubules, and diameter and thickness of epididymis tubules, although the effects were not seen in vivo. However, in both in vitro and in vivo, the diameter of prostatic tubules decreased significantly."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3205531/
Yep

Volume goes down too because balds get less sex
 

IdealForehead

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
3,025
It makes actually sense considering the evolutionary theory
People with genetics flaws are less likely to reproduce (even without all this incel bullshit theories)
Biologically it makes sense, but that's just a Darwin theory

From an evolutionary perspective baldness is mostly irrelevant. If you just go back a few thousand years no one was really living past their mid 30s and certainly it wouldn't have been common to reproduce past this point.

Eg. "Old age in ancient Egypt. People in ancient Egypt did not grow very old. Very high infant death rates due to high risks of infections resulted in an average age at death of 19 years. However those who survived childhood had a life expectancy of 30 years for women* and 34 years for men."

This is why when people ask "what's the evolutionary biology explanation for baldness?" the only correct answer in my opinion is that when humans were evolving, no one lived long enough to significantly experience or care about hairloss. So it was simply not a factor in determining reproductive success.
 

Saulus

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
641
It makes actually sense considering the evolutionary theory
People with genetics flaws are less likely to reproduce (even without all this incel bullshit theories)
Biologically it makes sense, but that's just a Darwin theory


Balding itself isnt a real genetic disadvantage - maybe you get a sunburn and skincancer at the scalp more easiliy but thats it.

But the same genes/circumstances that are connected to balding are also responsible for other, more severe disadvantages like higher chance of cardio diseases or infertility.

Basically balding shows that your body cant handle the stress that comes with the male hormones which is super unattractive - if your hairfolicles get damaged also other not visible parts of your body gets damaged.


Women dont want this disadvantages for their offsprings and thus are generelly less attracted to balding people
 

BaldyBalderBald

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531
From an evolutionary perspective baldness is mostly irrelevant. If you just go back a few thousand years no one was really living past their mid 30s and certainly it wouldn't have been common to reproduce past this point.

Eg. "Old age in ancient Egypt. People in ancient Egypt did not grow very old. Very high infant death rates due to high risks of infections resulted in an average age at death of 19 years. However those who survived childhood had a life expectancy of 30 years for women* and 34 years for men."

This is why when people ask "what's the evolutionary biology explanation for baldness?" the only correct answer in my opinion is that when humans were evolving, no one lived long enough to significantly experience or care about hairloss. So it was simply not a factor in determining reproductive success.

Look at other genetics flaws, people simply just can't reproduce or in a very limited way, security measures to avoid flaws to spread

But the same genes/circumstances that are connected to balding are also responsible for other, more severe disadvantages like higher chance of cardio diseases or infertility.

That's exactly what i'm talking about
Add prostate cancer aswell

Again that's just a theory, which makes sense with the Darwinian theory
 

IdealForehead

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
3,025
Look at other genetics flaws, people simply just can't reproduce or in a very limited way, security measures to avoid flaws to spread

That's exactly what i'm talking about
Add prostate cancer aswell

Yes but none of those factors would have contributed during the evolution of humanity, for the reason I said. People used to reproduce in their teens and early 20s and die by their 30s, at which ages in the overwhelming majority of men baldness has not even significantly onset.

If baldness was a disadvantage for reproduction historically it would not be so prevalent now.

It is only a problem now because we are living so much longer. Evolution may now start to select against baldness, but probably not still, as many men are concealing their bald genes with meds and transplants, plus still having kids naturally or with assistance.

Technology and social assistance have mostly rendered evolution obsolete. Survival of the fittest does not generally apply anymore. Even the sickest and weakest can now survive and reproduce if they choose.
 

Saulus

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
641
Yes but none of those factors would have contributed during the evolution of humanity, for the reason I said. People used to reproduce in their teens and early 20s and die by their 30s, at which ages in the overwhelming majority of men baldness has not even significantly onset.

If baldness was a disadvantage for reproduction historically it would not be so prevalent now.

It is only a problem now because we are living so much longer.


Baldness is a sign of ageing like wrinkles

And sime people get wrinkles or get bald earlier than other people- which is unattractive bc it shows the body cant handle the (oxidative) stress which only gets visible on the surface but ofc also affect your inner body, like in that case fuckin with your reproduction organs
 

Stanx22

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
2,776
That's why a young bald male must accept that his life is over (if he has nothing to compensate for being bald), and live a life of despair, misery, anger and hatred.
 

CaptainForehead

Senior Member
Reaction score
4,302
This is why when people ask "what's the evolutionary biology explanation for baldness?" the only correct answer in my opinion is that when humans were evolving, no one lived long enough to significantly experience or care about hairloss. So it was simply not a factor in determining reproductive success.

I started balding at 12, went on rogaine at 15.

Dad was NW5 at 17.
 

BaldyBalderBald

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531
All these article are beating around the bush, 'men who bald early are more likely to have a heart attack, lower sperm count etc' why not just straight up say 'men who bald early are genetic trash'

Well, we pretty much already know we are genetic trashes, i don't need dailymail to confirm this, i just need to get my hand through my hair
 

fixthis

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
282
Well, we pretty much already know we are genetic trashes, i don't need dailymail to confirm this, i just need to get my hand through my hair

I've got hairloss, depression and anxiety. And the only medication I'm on is finasteride, was really hoping to start an ssri this year especially because my depression gets quite bad in the winter.
 

BaldyBalderBald

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,531

fixthis

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
282
I've got bad news for you pal...

I've had those two conditions before finasteride but I don't know if I want to start an ssri because if I get side effects I won't know which one it's from. I can't drop the finasteride right now because I want to stop my hairloss until shesido comes out.
 
Top