Zinc

[timbo]

I expect commonly referred to reports and studies to be available online like every other lab abstract or clinical trial is when published by medical sites. If you have to go find something as obsolete as an offline library to find what you're looking for, chances are it isn't well corroborated. As it turns out, with regard to this, it isn't corroborated at all.

Not True! You can't expect to have everything at the click of a button.

 

[Bryan]

Not True! You can't expect to have everything at the click of a button.

Exactly! An excellent example of that would be the studies of James B. Hamilton, who did that legendary work with castrated men, and the effects of androgens on hairloss. Going back as far as the 1940's, his work is cited to this very day in current studies, but I've never seen it available online. If you want to read Hamilton's pioneering studies, it's off to the med library you go!

 

[DHTHater]

Not True! You can't expect to have everything at the click of a button.

Exactly! An excellent example of that would be the studies of James B. Hamilton, who did that legendary work with castrated men, and the effects of androgens on hairloss. Going back as far as the 1940's, his work is cited to this very day in current studies, but I've never seen it available online. If you want to read Hamilton's pioneering studies, it's off to the med library you go!

Sounds obsolete, antiquated and pointless given we know that now, and are on to things to do about it. Pass.

 

[47thin]

No offense DHT hater, but your arguments rational sounds like "it ain't on the inner-net, it must not be true!" which used to be "it ain't on TV, it must be a lie!". :jackit:

Hell, you could be right, but there is still a ton of knowledge that has not been scanned or put on the web. As a matter of fact, there is a ton of misinformation being paraded around as "truth" and brilliant authors are already discussing the fact that Wiki knowledge is replacing real facts. I have to ask, are you a PHD candidate on chem or an MD?

Also, just because someone is old, doesn't discredit their discoveries. Is I recall Newton and Einstein are "old", but you don't see people going "foof" at what they wrote. Yes, their are new theories- Stephen Hawking, etc, but they are substantiated by facts, not just "oh, it's old".

Like I said, you could be right, but in the long run, if it hadn't been for Propecia and minoxidil, all this snake oil would not be able to get a foothold- emu oil, caffeine, etc. I've said it before, it would be great to rub something on with no sides, etc, that you can get from a "natural" source, but I doubt it will regrow hair.

 

[DHTHater]

No offense DHT hater, but your arguments rational sounds like "it ain't on the inner-net, it must not be true!" which used to be "it ain't on TV, it must be a lie!". :jackit:

Hell, you could be right, but there is still a ton of knowledge that has not been scanned or put on the web. As a matter of fact, there is a ton of misinformation being paraded around as "truth" and brilliant authors are already discussing the fact that Wiki knowledge is replacing real facts. I have to ask, are you a PHD candidate on chem or an MD?

Also, just because someone is old, doesn't discredit their discoveries. Is I recall Newton and Einstein are "old", but you don't see people going "foof" at what they wrote. Yes, their are new theories- Stephen Hawking, etc, but they are substantiated by facts, not just "oh, it's old".

Like I said, you could be right, but in the long run, if it hadn't been for Propecia and minoxidil, all this snake oil would not be able to get a foothold- emu oil, caffeine, etc. I've said it before, it would be great to rub something on with no sides, etc, that you can get from a "natural" source, but I doubt it will regrow hair.

It looks like you missed the point entirely that I was trying to make with regard to Bryan. Bryan makes claims that no one can substantiate by searching online via credible medical studies, lab abstracts, or reliable medical reports, that fly in the face of what DOES EXIST online via credible medical studies, lab abstracts and reliable medical reports.

Take, for example, my signature quote vs. No. #3 in Bryan's signature. Bryan has been asserting that overshampooing is fine for the scalp and hair, and won't affect sebum production in any way, conveniently citing offline sources no one can corroborate, despite medical professionals saying otherwise. If you'd like to put your bet with Bryan on that, be my guest, but don't expect me or anyone else to be so blindly dissuaded from actual, genuine professional advice.

 

[47thin]

Actually, if you go on dr Lee's website, it will say that most of the stuff- too much shampooing, etc, are myths of hair loss. He's a doctor, he's on the web, and he says your wrong. Oh well.

The clogged pores theory is BS as well.

 

[DHTHater]

Actually, if you go on dr Lee's website, it will say that most of the stuff- too much shampooing, etc, are myths of hair loss. He's a doctor, he's on the web, and he says your wrong. Oh well.

The clogged pores theory is BS as well.

Unfortunately for you, saying something is "BS" doesn't make it so. Without credible/reliable links, it's not a valid claim. My signature is the quote of a professional that anyone can readily link to. Calling it "BS" doesn't make it go away. Back up your claims with substantiation we can all see or they continue to be just claims.

 

[47thin]

http://www.minoxidil.com/subpages/hairl ... ory_a.html

He has a section full of journal reports as well.

 

[techprof]

47thin,

But Dr. Lee is not as hot as Michelle Hanjani so he can't be trusted.

(Happened to see a video where she says saw palmetto might be of some value, but not worth it)

 

[Bryan]

Unfortunately for you, saying something is "BS" doesn't make it so. Without credible/reliable links, it's not a valid claim.

LOL!! Everybody take note that mere citations to the medical literature aren't good enough; to really be credible, you have to have clickable links to things on the Internet! :laugh:

 

[47thin]

BTW, I can't site the link, but a few scientific researcher- skeptical inquirer, etc, have said something to the effect that if a "natural" compound can have a dramatic effect on something, it will almost always come with a side effect. Example, eating too much carrots can make you look orange- it happened to my wife! Basically, if there were a natural Propecia, such as Saw Palmetto, if it really worked internally, it would also have the same potential side effects. Plenty of things that grow in nature can kill you.

As I have said, if something worked as well as 2% rogaine, they'd sell it over the counter and proudly claim it. And yes, they would probably test it with the FDA. Plenty of other crap does- i.e, ineffective anti depressants, cholesterol meds, etc.

Finally, the burden of proof is always with the person that claims something works, not the disclaimer. That's from Philosphy/Logic/Science 101.

 

[DHTHater]

Unfortunately for you, saying something is "BS" doesn't make it so. Without credible/reliable links, it's not a valid claim.

LOL!! Everybody take note that mere citations to the medical literature aren't good enough; to really be credible, you have to have clickable links to things on the Internet! :laugh:

Right. Because for all we know you wrote it yourself. See how that works? :laugh:

 

[DHTHater]

http://www.minoxidil.com/subpages/hairloss_myths/hairloss_myths_catagory_a.html

He has a section full of journal reports as well.

Unfortunately, nothing here addresses anything I've ever talked about (with 1 exception listed below). Nothing there refuted the quote in my signature either. :dunno:

I would also point out that this is in fact false on its face:

"Myth: male pattern baldness can be prevented or improved by good nutrition".

As we know, nutrition control can control cholesterol, which in turn dictates, in part, our level of testosterone, which of course is converted to DHT. An increase in ingested beta-sitosterol is shown to lower serum cholesterol. It's not surprise too that a common side effect of excess beta-sitosterol shows similar side effects to Propecia (decreased libido due to lower testosterone).

Please at least start acting like you aren't so naive that you can't see Dr. Lee shilling for his products by dismissing the proposed efficacy of everything else. I'd like to feel I'm not the only grown up here.
Thanks.

 

[47thin]

Actually, I had a little contact with Dr Lee. Since I am allergic to minoxidil, he said go see a doctor about finasteride and have it cut up. He didn't try to sell me spironolactone or Retinol or his regrowth shampoo. He didn't try to sell me anything.

PS, He knows more than you do about hair loss. Sorry, but he does.

BTW, I use Beta sis every day for Cholesterol, and no effects like propecia. None. No sexual effects, prostate still the same and no difference in the thinning of my hair. And it's been over a year and a half!

Yes, it's anecdotal, but you brought it up. Do you work at a GNC or something? Drop your propecia and just go on the stuff you use and see what happens.

 

[DHTHater]

Actually, I had a little contact with Dr Lee. Since I am allergic to minoxidil, he said go see a doctor about finasteride and have it cut up. He didn't try to sell me spironolactone or Retinol or his regrowth shampoo. He didn't try to sell me anything.

PS, He knows more than you do about hair loss. Sorry, but he does.

BTW, I use Beta sis every day for Cholesterol, and no effects like propecia. None. No sexual effects, prostate still the same and no difference in the thinning of my hair. And it's been over a year and a half!

Yes, it's anecdotal, but you brought it up. Do you work at a GNC or something? Drop your propecia and just go on the stuff you use and see what happens.

:roll:

Here we goooo

1. I never claimed I knew more than Doctor Lee about hair loss. I'm quite confident that I do not. Only that this statement is categorically false "Myth: male pattern baldness can be prevented or improved by good nutrition". as it conflicts with statistical data showing otherwise, and what other Doctors are saying. If it was not false, my own Dermatologist (Dr. Sara Wasserbauer), the doctor who prescribed my Propecia, wouldn't have suggested the type of diet I stay away from, and the types of things I should eat to help, in conjunction with Propecia prevent further loss.

2. I never claimed taking Beta siitosterol alone would cure or prevent balding, only that it has shown ability, taken orally, in vivo, to both lower testosterone, and DHT. Obviously results would vary from person to person, and there are a myriad of variables to consider (e.g how much beta-sitosterol are you taking, what is your diet like, how much fat intake do you have, what is your age, do you exercise etc etc). If your fat intake is high, both good and bad fats even, all the beta sitosterol in the world couldn't dent your testosterone level. Furthermore, I'm obviously going to be skeptical about the guy arguing against me about his anecdotal claims brought into the argument. The bottom line is Dr Lee's assertion is flat out wrong about nutrition not being able to improve male pattern baldness, Even if he doesn't know it. because we can lessen our levels of testosterone with a deliberate and controlled diet. The problem here is he is thinking directly, while Beta-sitosterol works indirectly to lower DHT.

3. Nothing else of what Dr Lee says in your link addresses what I've talked about with my signature quote. That was the point of contention you've thus far been unable to refute. Dr. Lee never said excessive cleaning does not cause a reactionary compensation by sebaceous glands. My signature quote still stands, Bryan's make believe studies or outmoded and spurious data included.


Try to find more relevant links germane to the original argument (my signature) : overcleanisng causes sebaceous gland compensation on the scalp, because so far, Bryan has not.

 

[47thin]

DHT, you would need to be starving. There are plenty of people that eat crap and have good heads of hair, and have excellent diets and poor heads. Good nutrition is not going to dent male pattern baldness. You are giving people false hope. Look at all the bums with full heads of hair. Look at all the pro athletes with male pattern baldness. Their health is constantly monitored. You will never be as healthy as a pro soccer /basketball player. You are talking about extreme cases of malnutrition, maybe. I know grossly obese diabetics with great heads of hair.

 

[DHTHater]

DHT, you would need to be starving. There are plenty of people that eat crap and have good heads of hair, and have excellent diets and poor heads. Good nutrition is not going to dent male pattern baldness. You are giving people false hope. Look at all the bums with full heads of hair. Look at all the pro athletes with male pattern baldness. Their health is constantly monitored. You will never be as healthy as a pro soccer /basketball player. You are talking about extreme cases of malnutrition, maybe. I know grossly obese diabetics with great heads of hair.

You're having reading comprehension issues it would seem. Putting aside that you dodged my signature quote point again for a moment; you're confusing a totally different argument "good diet V bad diet" with a supplement that indirectly lowers DHT. We're not talking about McDonalds vs Whole Earth Foods now. We're talking one supplement that has been shown, in vivo, to indirectly lower DHT.

male pattern baldness is irrelevant to the fact that Beta sitosterol indirectly lowers DHT. Whether or not someone has male pattern baldness or not, beta sitosterol will still indirectly lower their DHT. To what degree wholly varies from person to person, and most certainly it would never be profound enough in someone with male pattern baldness to rely on solely.

Again, this beta-sitosterol thing has apparently become your red herring to escape the embarrassment you and Bryan face with regard to the lack of any evidence to refute the quote in my signature that this was initially about. I suppose anyone can see why you wouldn't want to be held responsible for uncorroborated claims that conflict with what actual top medical practitioners are saying about shampooing and sebum production.

 

[47thin]

So, the sebum glands know when you shampoo too much? The only source I see is your doctor. I would think they work like sweat glands, fairly mechanical- the amount of exertion = amount of sweat- not the skin telling the glands we are to dry! help!

All those pro athletes who shower 2 times per day, and have full heads of hair, somethings wrong! Wait, the ones that are losing hair are shampooing too much- it has nothing to do with heredity or DHT?

Also, you bolstered your claim that Dr Lee was wrong, as he wants to sell snake oil, yet my direct experience with him was that he declined to sell me anything?

Please do an experiment and drop the finasteride for a year, and use just the supplements and see how it goes.

 

[timbo]

So, the sebum glands know when you shampoo too much? The only source I see is your doctor. I would think they work like sweat glands, fairly mechanical- the amount of exertion = amount of sweat- not the skin telling the glands we are to dry! help!

All those pro athletes who shower 2 times per day, and have full heads of hair, somethings wrong! Wait, the ones that are losing hair are shampooing too much- it has nothing to do with heredity or DHT?

I will admit that DHTHater is being a little obtuse about his claims regarding outdated/offline sources, but his signature quote simply claims that sebum production increases the more times you wash your hair, not that excess sebum on the scalp directly exacerbates male pattern baldness. See the difference?

 

[47thin]

So, if excess sebum has no effect on male pattern baldness, who cares????