Question for the "Spin-Meister" Stephen Foote!

[Bryan]

You made the following interesting statement in one of your links:

The recognised effects of DHT are as follows:

1. Increased body hair growth.

2. Increased Sebum production.

3. Change in the efficiency of normal, non specialised sweat glands.

4. Reduced scalp hair growth.

5. Hyperplastic enlargement of the prostate gland.

All these recognised effects could logically be linked to as a primary action of DHT upon lymphatic drainage efficiency.

Are you actually claiming that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP must be reduced in size and put out less sebum, due to the alleged increase in "fluid pressure" caused by problems with lymphatic drainage efficiency? Is that really your story? If I were to provide proof to you that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP are big and fat and produce even MORE sebum than the ones in non-balding scalp, would you admit that that's evidence against your little theory?

This is a SERIOUS question. Please give me a SERIOUS, straight answer.

Bryan

 

[S Foote.]

You made the following interesting statement in one of your links:

The recognised effects of DHT are as follows:

1. Increased body hair growth.

2. Increased Sebum production.

3. Change in the efficiency of normal, non specialised sweat glands.

4. Reduced scalp hair growth.

5. Hyperplastic enlargement of the prostate gland.

All these recognised effects could logically be linked to as a primary action of DHT upon lymphatic drainage efficiency.

Are you actually claiming that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP must be reduced in size and put out less sebum, due to the alleged increase in "fluid pressure" caused by problems with lymphatic drainage efficiency? Is that really your story? If I were to provide proof to you that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP are big and fat and produce even MORE sebum than the ones in non-balding scalp, would you admit that that's evidence against your little theory?

This is a SERIOUS question. Please give me a SERIOUS, straight answer.

Bryan

Here's my straight answer Bryan!

This remember was my original thoughts in my published paper. My object in coming to these forums after i developed this theory, was to see if anyone could come up with information that would convince me i was on the wrong track.

So far there has been nothing that has raised any doubt in my mind that my theory is wrong. In fact there is increasingly more and more information from modern research that further supports my theory.

I have posted the responses from recognised experts in hair loss research as you know, and i am sorry if you can't deal with this, but there it is!

I have changed my opinion on `EXACT' mechanisms, like the transplantation issue as you know, but these details are still consistent with the theory in my opinion.

I still think the sebaceous gland relationship holds true in hairy mammals, and where DHT `grows' hair in humans.

You claim above that the sebaceous glands enlarge in the male pattern baldness area. I can see a case for why these previously `large' glands should remain so in human male pattern baldness, so can you provide citations that `prove' what you say above Bryan?

S Foote.

 

[oni]

Get a small trampoline or rebounder that should help lymphatic drainage efficiency. lol! :roll:

 

[Bryan]

You claim above that the sebaceous glands enlarge in the male pattern baldness area. I can see a case for why these previously `large' glands should remain so in human male pattern baldness...

Explain that "case" to me. Why/when would that occur, and why are you contradicting what you said previously?

Bryan

 

[Dave001]

You made the following interesting statement in one of your links:

The recognised effects of DHT are as follows:

1. Increased body hair growth.

2. Increased Sebum production.

3. Change in the efficiency of normal, non specialised sweat glands.

4. Reduced scalp hair growth.

5. Hyperplastic enlargement of the prostate gland.

All these recognised effects could logically be linked to as a primary action of DHT upon lymphatic drainage efficiency.

Are you actually claiming that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP must be reduced in size and put out less sebum, due to the alleged increase in "fluid pressure" caused by problems with lymphatic drainage efficiency? Is that really your story? If I were to provide proof to you that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP are big and fat and produce even MORE sebum than the ones in non-balding scalp, would you admit that that's evidence against your little theory?

This is a SERIOUS question. Please give me a SERIOUS, straight answer.

Bryan

Here's my straight answer Bryan!

Where is your answer? For a 'yes' or 'no' question, it doesn't seem like a very straight answer.

This remember was my original thoughts in my published paper. My object in coming to these forums after i developed this theory, was to see if anyone could come up with information that would convince me i was on the wrong track.

So far there has been nothing that has raised any doubt in my mind that my theory is wrong. In fact there is increasingly more and more information from modern research that further supports my theory.

I have posted the responses from recognised experts in hair loss research as you know, and i am sorry if you can't deal with this, but there it is!

I have changed my opinion on `EXACT' mechanisms, like the transplantation issue as you know, but these details are still consistent with the theory in my opinion.

I still think the sebaceous gland relationship holds true in hairy mammals, and where DHT `grows' hair in humans.

You claim above that the sebaceous glands enlarge in the male pattern baldness area. I can see a case for why these previously `large' glands should remain so in human male pattern baldness, so can you provide citations that `prove' what you say above Bryan?

 

[S Foote.]

You made the following interesting statement in one of your links:

The recognised effects of DHT are as follows:

1. Increased body hair growth.

2. Increased Sebum production.

3. Change in the efficiency of normal, non specialised sweat glands.

4. Reduced scalp hair growth.

5. Hyperplastic enlargement of the prostate gland.

All these recognised effects could logically be linked to as a primary action of DHT upon lymphatic drainage efficiency.

Are you actually claiming that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP must be reduced in size and put out less sebum, due to the alleged increase in "fluid pressure" caused by problems with lymphatic drainage efficiency? Is that really your story? If I were to provide proof to you that sebaceous glands IN BALDING SCALP are big and fat and produce even MORE sebum than the ones in non-balding scalp, would you admit that that's evidence against your little theory?

This is a SERIOUS question. Please give me a SERIOUS, straight answer.

Bryan

Here's my straight answer Bryan!

Where is your answer? For a 'yes' or 'no' question, it doesn't seem like a very straight answer.

This remember was my original thoughts in my published paper. My object in coming to these forums after i developed this theory, was to see if anyone could come up with information that would convince me i was on the wrong track.

So far there has been nothing that has raised any doubt in my mind that my theory is wrong. In fact there is increasingly more and more information from modern research that further supports my theory.

I have posted the responses from recognised experts in hair loss research as you know, and i am sorry if you can't deal with this, but there it is!

I have changed my opinion on `EXACT' mechanisms, like the transplantation issue as you know, but these details are still consistent with the theory in my opinion.

I still think the sebaceous gland relationship holds true in hairy mammals, and where DHT `grows' hair in humans.

You claim above that the sebaceous glands enlarge in the male pattern baldness area. I can see a case for why these previously `large' glands should remain so in human male pattern baldness, so can you provide citations that `prove' what you say above Bryan?

Huh??

Bryan asked me to give a `straight' answer, not a `yes or no' answer :roll:

He got what he asked for!

S Foote.

 

[Bryan]

NO Bryan, increased Sebum production in balding scalp would be evidence 'for' his theory!!!!

How so? Please explain.

 

[Bryan]

Surely there is a some correlation between skin's sebum secretion, 'fluid' content and TEWL.

I doubt it.

 

[amsch]

Surely there is a some correlation between skin's sebum secretion, 'fluid' content and TEWL.

I doubt it.

bryan, take a look at the DHT functions in your body-topic please. :whistle:

 

[squeegee]

Really good thread! :beer: