Why is the thinning area in male pattern baldness exactly the galea area ?

[cyberprimate]

I read Bryan post saying that the galea theory of reduced blood flow had failed as an explanation to male pattern baldness, but what logical explanation is there yet regarding this similarity of scalp area between male pattern baldness and galea? It's one thing to disprove a wrong hypothesis, it's another to give explanation to a striking observation. Is there an explanation or other hypothesis than reduced blood flow on the galea aponeurotica area? is the involvement of the galea in hair loss totally denied by modern theorists of male pattern baldness ?

 

[cyberprimate]

It looks obvious male pattern baldness has to do with the galea, but so far i haven't read any really convincing explanation of how this galea interferes, directly or through a complex systemic process, with hair growth (the theory of poor blood supply due to the galea has been disproven as far as i remember). Yet I can't understand why this absence of explanation so far justifies that we should discard the role of the galea from male pattern baldness theory or research.

 

[Val]

I just read a post by this Maliniak (second-to-last post here: http://www.hairlossbuddy.com/11/dht/) and what he is saying does sound logical and, for the most part, devoid of that that vibe regular snakeoil claims give.

Would be quite interested to hear some more comments on the subject, especially since the correlation of the Galea and male pattern baldness areas is rather striking.

 

[elliotramsey]

I just read a post by this Maliniak (second-to-last post here: http://www.hairlossbuddy.com/11/dht/) and what he is saying does sound logical and, for the most part, devoid of that that vibe regular snakeoil claims give.

Would be quite interested to hear some more comments on the subject, especially since the correlation of the Galea and male pattern baldness areas is rather striking.

I started a thread about the maliniak method in the experimental treatments forum. I think what he says about the galea goes a bit in line with what Tom Hagerty says and, to an extent, the skull expansion theory.

When my precalculus book from amazon is refunded im gonna buy his ebook to see what it says.

 

[cyberprimate]

Leon Maliniak defends the old and outdated theory that poor blood supply to follicles due to tight galea is the root cause of hairloss. I remember reading pretty convincing posts by Bryan, and elsewhere on the web, that it couldn't be so. Still i give a lot of credit to the hypothesis that the galea is the root cause of male pattern baldness, that it alters the life of follicles but in a way that we don't know or understand yet. It's a very mysterious question since everyone has a galea…

The notion that the galea is not responsible and just happens to be there, has always sounded illogical to my ears.

 

[Bryan]

See the first post in my thread "Dispensing with old-fashioned male pattern baldness theories, and one NEW one!", which is currently near the top of the "New Discoveries" forum. I present details of the 1979 Nordstrom study, in which hair follicles from the front part of a balding young man's scalp were transplanted to his arm, and they continued to go bald at the same rate as they did when they were on his scalp (obviously, the arm doesn't even contain a galea). That's powerful experimental evidence against the silly "galea theory", which is similar to other explanations that people used to come up with a long time ago to explain balding, like wearing too-tight hats. We've come a long way since those olden days, folks, let's try to keep up with the latest and greatest medical technology!

 

[Val]

hair follicles from the front part of a balding young man's scalp were transplanted to his arm, and they continued to go bald at the same rate as they did when they were on his scalp (obviously, the arm doesn't even contain a galea).

To top it up, it just occurred to me that hair transplanted from the back of the head are not affected by Galea.

Still, such male pattern baldness/galea area resemblance being just a coincident? Hard to ignore Occam's razor.

 

[cyberprimate]

Hard to ignore Occam's razor.

All the more since female pattern hair loss covers the same area as the galea (different evolution in time but same terminal shape). So it doesn't seem to be exclusive to male pattern baldness. The idea that the galea covering the same exact balding area is sheer coincidence doesn't sound realistic at all. As you say, Occam's razor kind of thing.

Sure the 1979 study referred by Bryan is striking (I've just read it), but I wouldn't be surprised we find out one day that the presence of the galea is in fact a root factor in male pattern baldness process but in a way we didn't expect. One could imagine for instance that the galea+dht combination initiates the thinning process and makes it last for years or decades, after transplantation to a galea free region of the body, if other helping measures to the follicles are not taken (the Norstrom study covered only 21 months of hair evolution and nothing was done to the bald or thinning grafts to revive follicles).

 

[cyberprimate]

To top it up, it just occurred to me that hair transplanted from the back of the head are not affected by Galea.

Is there a study confirming this somewhere ? I guess to be conclusive that study should cover an 8 or 10 year period as it takes time for male pattern baldness to be observable. Also are we sure that transplanted hair on top of the head are in the same exact position or distance from the galea once transplanted?

Leon Maliniak wrote to me saying he was okay with me publishing his emails. I'll leave them on the "Maliniak method" thread in "Experimental Treatments, Vitamins & Supplements".

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

hair follicles from the front part of a balding young man's scalp were transplanted to his arm, and they continued to go bald at the same rate as they did when they were on his scalp (obviously, the arm doesn't even contain a galea).

To top it up, it just occurred to me that hair transplanted from the back of the head are not affected by Galea.

Still, such male pattern baldness/galea area resemblance being just a coincident? Hard to ignore Occam's razor.

Occam's razor isn't a scientific proof, it's just a logical deduction shortcut that might be wrong.

In this case, Brian has already shown that it's wrong. Therefore "Occam's Razor" would apply to assuming Brian is correct.

 

[cyberprimate]

In this case, Brian has already shown that it's wrong. Therefore "Occam's Razor" would apply to assuming Brian is correct.

I'm questioning the absoluteness of the conclusion of that 1979 Norstrom study. Imagine that living many years in one environment "A" causes a long lasting alteration of an organism and destroys it gradually. If you transfer this organism in a safe environment "B", the long lasting effect of the environment "A" could well cause the damage to last further despite the change of environment. No? (also if this alteration by the environment "A" takes a decade to be observable, you may put another similar organism in it and not see any damage to it for months or years). What I'm suggesting is the possibility of inertia in follicle damage that was not considered by Norstrom.

 

[cyberprimate]

then why treat the galea area?

From what I understand Maliniak suggests beside some specific scalp massages, violet ray (early 20th century electrotherapy) should be applied to the follicles to "revive" them. Return to the future!!! Now the question is has any scientific study been conducted on the effects of violet ray on hair growth?

 

[TheGrayMan2001]

I think you're grasping at straws when it's pretty clear androgens are the only real culprit here.

 

[cyberprimate]

From what i understand Maliniak is not saying dht is not involved in male pattern baldness but it is the presence of the galea that causes dht to harm hair instead of stimulating its growth. The question of why dht causes hairloss here and not there on the scalp has yet to be answered, no?

 

[elliotramsey]

The fact that dht causes hair growth all over the body and Hairloss on the top of the scalp suggests that something else is at work

 

[bigentries]

I'm completely ignorant about anatomy, but this tissue also exists in other balding apes?

 

[freakout]

Please excuse me for butting in.

In research, there are baseline references (often constants) which are used to determine variables or changes. All of these are refered to as 'factors' which simply means that they have something to do or contribute to the equation.

The galea, while it may have determined the shape of male pattern baldness, it is a 'constant' and a factor. As a constant, all men have the same galea. If we blame the galea as the factor that 'causes' baldness, it's like blaming water in a drowning incident.

 

[Val]

If we blame the galea as the factor that 'causes' baldness, it's like blaming water in a drowning incident.

With this, I will dispute. There is still water, and there is torrents, whirlpools, etc. So the fact you can swim safely in one basin, does not mean every basin is equally nonthreatening.
Most men start balding at some point.

 

[cyberprimate]

As a constant, all men have the same galea.

That's possible. And maybe not. How come i'm not as flexible as my yoga teacher when we both have tendons and muscles in the legs?

The galea, while it may have determined the shape of male pattern baldness, it is a 'constant' and a factor.

There are 2 problems here i think :
- I totally understand your logic. Women that don't have hormonal imbalance don't experience hairloss on the galea area. They only get the male pattern baldness horseshoe when their hormones change. So let's treat the hormones first. But the hair that is not on the galea isn't as much (or at all) affected by this hormonal change so why not do something on the galea's effects on hair as well or at first?
- The 1979 Norstrom study didn't say the galea was a "factor" at all. If you read Bryan post: "The presence or absence of the galea aponeurotica does not influence the balding process in male pattern baldness." In other words, for Nostrom the Galea/horseshoe shape experienced by men and women does exist but it's there by sheer coincidence… And I don't buy it.

 

[freakout]

I tend to think that the equation is very much larger than we think. The Androgenetic Alopecia theory merely speaks of male hormones, gene and enzymes.

A japanese study finds that blood flow in bald men are lower by 2.6 times.

So we add blood supply to the equation. We now have: male hormones, genes, enzyme and blood supply.

Why will the scalp skin cells produce enzymes? Because it needs to eat. Why is it producing more enzymes than the other parts of the scalp? Because it's trying to catalyze more due to low blood supply.

Why does it take the shape of the galea? Because it is the area where blood supply is more restricted.

That's my wild theory and I can't prove it.