So I guess years and years of evidence that dht is the main culprit behind Androgenetic Alopecia is completely wrong. This is broscience at its finest! Please tell me more about imagination land.
I have explained time and again that DHT is not the culprit, but the trigger. Apart from that, the cause of action seems to be as follows:
High local DHT -> upregulated PGD2 (probably there because of regular hair cycling, but much overexpressed) -> same symptoms as chronic inflammation -> fibrotic tissue generation -> damage to hair follicles
DHT is the trigger that later on leads to the generation of fibrotic tissue. The fibrotic tissue is what effectively damages and impairs the hair follicles. You can stop hair loss by stopping fibrotic tissue production (e.g. through minoxidil, which blocks collagen synthesis, and thus also fibrotic collagen synthesis), or by acting further upstream and addressing DHT. The problem is that DHT still is not the root cause, as has been shown by various studies where patches of hair of people not affected by Androgenetic Alopecia were administered with high doses of DHT, without hair loss being the result. The one thing, ladies and gentlemen, which sits above the DHT, that is the holy grail of hair loss. And it has not been found yet.
@odalbak: admittedly, I haven't. While pure B12 will probably be bioactive (but I'm getting plenty of that via diet anyway), I kind of doubt that castor oil will be. Just the presence of a substance does not mean it can or will be used by the body. One of the reasons why you can't absorb steaks via your skin
ok, that was a bad example.
I understand you have your own beliefs, which I completely respect by the way.
I don't know about you, but I try to keep beliefs out of this.
But to say that the Galea theory is bull**** because you haven't seen any evidence is completely wrong. First of all there are 2 well established/respected studies that support the Galea theory and show better results than any studies I've seen ever.
Then provide links to these studies please.
secondly, even if the Detumescence therapy study isn't real (which I think it probably is) it 1: working for virtually everybody that tries it 2: it confirms the validity in the Galea theory. There's a number in the study.... Care to call it?
I contacted the author via email, but to no avail. In the thread about the detumescence therapy I also explained which points about it are great (e.g., the model which finally manages to explain the pattern in which hair loss occurs) and which suck (e.g., any proper evaluative data).
BTW: I'm pretty fibrotic tissue doesn't come back within a days time (or even less) and tighten your scalp back up by decreasing ROM. We aren't talking trigger points here man.... Fibrotic tissue doesn't disappear then after a while "magically" reappear again out of nowhere. If you don't know what I mean you can try dropping the manual massage for a day- a couple days (this can vary due to stress levels) & see how fast your scalp will tighten back up on you again...
To be honest, I don't know what you're talking about. Nobody ever assumed that fibrotic tissue will magically reappear. The problem is, though, that massages also don't completely destroy it, but probably only rip apart strands which just need to reconnect. If massages could destroy fibrotic tissue for good, we would basically be cured.