American Indian, Rain forest people, DHT blocker diet?

[freakout]

The 'brain cooling' theory is the worst I've ever heard.
Androgenetics IS JUNK SCIENCE because it does not account for associations with CVDs. male pattern baldness is a SYMPTOM.

androgen + genes = junk science that pharmaceuticals like to stick in your face

androgen + epigenes + xfactor = the way to solve male pattern baldness

The xfactor should account for CVDs, prostate cancer.

 

[freakout]

Our evolutionary connection with other primates do not matter. It has been shown that it could take just 100,000 years OR LESS to evolve into a another subspecies specially when a group is exposed to radically changed ENVIRONMENT.

This can be seen even amongst humans - different races looked different in just 40 thousand years. They also found human adult skeletal remains just more than 3 feet tall which died out just 10,000 years ago.

This means that we only have to look as far back as our prehistoric HUMAN ancestors years ago to find a comparison with modern lifestyle conditions.

 

[dabritz]

If you except the theory of evolution, then you would understand that it is said that Native American people are the closest of our own species in similarity to Neanderthals and and in turn to Primates. Primates obviously have hair all over their bodies yet admittedly some of them do still lose their hair, however how many monkeys/apes/primates do you know of that live in extreme cold conditions such as Alaska?? Exactly very few to none, with the exception to a type of baboon that lives in frigid conditions somewhere in Japan(forget the species name) And guess what that species of ape doesn't lose it's hair. Why?? Because in my opinion they simply can't afford to lose their hair in order to keep their heads warm in the extreme cold. Don't think I need to explain to you that monkeys/apes/primates do not dress themselves for the cold.

Perhaps more accurately, the "brain cooling" theory for the evolution of balding may explain the lack of that specific evolution in that species of Japanese monkey.

Are those the same monkeys that live in the hot springs of Japan that were featured in the Olympics all the time when it was in Nagano? Can't see a lot of heat being generated by that brain!

Yes, they are featured on BBC's series LIFE. And on planet earth I believe as well.

 

[freakout]

Where did you get them? And your missing a stat. that is criticle to my thought....What % of men show signs of hairloss in their lifetime?

http://www.bionews.org.uk/page_12372.asp
I'm just expounding from the book.

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=64177

 

[freakout]

I don't know if anything can be made out of this:

A researcher in the UK experimented with the diet of inmates by lowering the meat intake and increasing veggies.

Results were lower incidence of violence inside the prison.

And then I've read a post somewhere which I can't verify that prison inmates are less likely affected by male pattern baldness.

Bullshit!

It will be a bit of a stretch to conclude anything about high protein diet even if the latter is true but it implies lifestyle may have something to do with male pattern baldness.

 

[freakout]

BTW, did you notice the paradox in the thread "How do horseshoe follicles react to androgens?" Or did I miss something in that thread?

 

[freakout]

What is your opinion and why?

20% of men at age 20 increasing to 50% at age 50 in WESTERN countries.
5% of men at age 20 increasing to 20% at age 50 in EASTASIAN countries.

Virtually every 'opinion' I posted is Mercado's. It is all that I am allowed to post. It's also a small fraction of what you'll find in his book.
--------------
Within the SAME population, the progression of male pattern baldness is very highly varied among men. Some are fairly quick which can begin at any age as if triggered by something. Some are very slow spaning decades to complete the NH scale. Some are somewhere in between. The lucky ones just cease their progression with no attempt to prevent male pattern baldness.

If male pattern baldness is purely genetic, it will be as quick as losing hair at the upper temporal area; It will be as quick and coincide with growing pubic hair.

If you bring in the subject of epigenetics, it can be asserted that male pattern baldness was primarily environmentally/lifestyle influenced.

Again, that's Mercado's opinion.
-------------------
BTW, did you notice the paradox in the thread "How do horseshoe follicles react to androgens?" Or did I miss something in that thread?

 

[armandein]

as our brains evolved and became larger it generated more heat.???
or need more heat?
It is not clear, our brain don't act as a evaporator. I think¡ that we evolved to a larger scalp hair in order to insulate the brain, diferent to help cool the brain, because what happen in colder climates, what is the purposse of a balding head? :whistle:

 

[Bryan]

as our brains evolved and became larger it generated more heat.???
or need more heat?

It generated more heat, of course. Seriously, which animals do you think generate more heat in their brains due to complex mental processing: (1) various primate species, or (2) cats, dogs, fish, birds, bears, snakes, etc.?

It is not clear, our brain don't act as a evaporator. I think¡ that we evolved to a larger scalp hair in order to insulate the brain, diferent to help cool the brain, because what happen in colder climates, what is the purposse of a balding head? :whistle:

"Insulating" the brain against cold was obviously not an issue in the early primate ancestor that first evolved balding. That probably occurred in the intense heat of equatorial Africa! Cooling the increasingly complex brain was obviously of paramount importance.

 

[Bryan]

Any opinion on Dr. Rassman's assertion regarding the American Indian not having the balding gene? I mean if balding first evovled in our primate ancestors (and the brain cooling theory sounds as reasonable as any to me) how can it jive that a whole people just don't have the gene? :dunno:

I don't have any particular opinion on what he said about it. I think the fact that some whole races don't have balding simply shows that it obviously isn't as complete, as well-ensconced, in humans as it is, for example, in stumptailed macaques. All of them eventually develop balding, even the females.

 

[Bryan]

I don't beleive that the balding genes were inherited from apes. I believe that the balding genes are a slight variation in our genetics, that spawned from a random gene mutations (like race did), it is clear that humans varied races were spawned by genetic variations/mutations within the human species, the balding gene is no different. The fact that Native Americans do not carry it demonstrates this. I don't buy that stupid brain cooling theory....

I have some questions for you, based on what you said above:

1) If you don't believe that balding was inherited from apes (or some early ancestor of the primates), do you think it's just a really weird coincidence that some primates have indeed developed that same affliction in their scalp hair?

2) Does your use of the term "balding genes" include the genes that determine the structure and chemical behavior of scalp hair follicles (specifically, the fact that they are damaged and suppressed by androgens), or does it only include the various genes which have an effect on the intensity of the androgenic stimulus in the body, and other, lower-level factors?

3) I suppose it would be difficult for you to explain why you consider the brain cooling theory to be "stupid", so I'll simply ask you THIS: do you have what you consider to be a better, smarter theory for the evolution of balding in humans?

 

[Bryan]

1) If you don't believe that balding was inherited from apes (or some early ancestor of the primates), do you think it's just a really weird coincidence that some primates have indeed developed that same affliction in their scalp hair?

First of all I cannot reconsile how a gene would be passed down from apes and not manifest itself in an entire race of humans (American Indians) this seems illogical to me, it just doesn't fit.

I personally consider the most important "balding gene" to be the one that causes scalp hair follicles to be sensitive to androgens (damaged and suppressed by them). I very strongly suspect (although I can't absolutely prove it) that ALL human beings, even American Indians, have that gene. The reason that American Indians don't show any obvious balding is because of other genes of lesser import (the specific androgen receptor polymorphism they have, how much testosterone they synthesize, how much 5a-reductase they produce, etc.). Those last ones help protect them from any obvious balding, even though they still have the main Balding Gene.

Now to answer your question: I think that our genetic similarities make it likely that a few similar conditions could occur in both of our seperate species; that is to say, that our genes are similar, perhaps their genes could have developed/mutated a similar trait.

You think that our genetic similarities in all these species could have caused such a very SPECIFIC mutation to occur (an OPPOSITE response of all our scalp hair follicles to androgens)????? :shock: :dunno: :thumbdown2:

2) Does your use of the term "balding genes" include the genes that determine the structure and chemical behavior of scalp hair follicles (specifically, the fact that they are damaged and suppressed by androgens), or does it only include the various genes which have an effect on the intensity of the androgenic stimulus in the body, and other, lower-level factors?

I was referring to the following genes:

I was exclusively referring to the few genes which have been found to have a direct correlation with Androgenetic Alopecia (see below), thus far, many have yet to be identified. {snip list of genes}

Okay, so the answer to my question is obviously NO, your use of the term "balding genes" apparently does NOT include the ones that cause scalp hair follicles to be sensitive to androgens. It includes one which pertains to the specific kind of androgen receptor a person has (which is associated with levels of androgen stimulation), and a few others whose roles aren't clearly known or defined.

3) I suppose it would be difficult for you to explain why you consider the brain cooling theory to be "stupid", so I'll simply ask you THIS: do you have what you consider to be a better, smarter theory for the evolution of balding in humans?

I would postulate that the causes of Androgenetic Alopecia are no different than the cause of the development of the Epicanthic Fold in Asians, which was oubviously not inherited from apes.. That is to say, It just occured, and was passed down through genetics, I believe that it was from a micro mutation, as was the case in P2RY5...

For you to claim that the completely separate and spontaneous accidental mutation of scalp hair follicles into being androgen-sensitive in some of today's primates I think is nearly as silly as saying that it would also be just an accident and "just occurred", if ALL humans and ALL apes had an epicanthic fold!!

 

[Bryan]

You have faith in your theory, and I have faith in mine, while it is convenient for you to claim that Native Americans do carry the balding, it seems oubvious that they do not. Seriously? They have lower 5 Alpha reductase levels? Come on man, you can do better than that!

Do you believe that the scalp hair of American Indians is actually stimulated by androgens?

 

[Bryan]

You have faith in your theory, and I have faith in mine, while it is convenient for you to claim that Native Americans do carry the balding, it seems oubvious that they do not. Seriously? They have lower 5 Alpha reductase levels? Come on man, you can do better than that!

Do you believe that the scalp hair of American Indians is actually stimulated by androgens?

Oubviously not in such a way as to stimulate minaturization.

Your answer is a little evasive. I'll ask again, but more directly: do you think that the growth of scalp hair of American Indians is actually enhanced and benefitted by androgens?

 

[Bryan]

I feel like this is a loaded question. I have already explained my opinions, what are you getting at?

What I'm getting at is something which I've already discussed lots of times, and not just tonight/this morning: BALDING IS CAUSED BY THE SENSITIVITY OF SCALP HAIR FOLLICLES TO ANDROGENS. It can be ameliorated to some extent by other factors like the ones I've already mentioned, like levels of androgen production, steroidogenic enzymes, androgen receptor polymorphisms, and probably a dozen other things we don't even fully know about; those are the things that are talked about on hairloss sites over and over ad nauseum. But the thing above in capital letters is THE MAIN ISSUE. Unfortunately, we have no way (yet) to treat it or alter it directly.

 

[Bryan]

This enters into the realm of speculation. One thing that we do know is a fact, is that Androgenetic Alopecia is undoubtedly hereditary hence genetics. The fact that American Indians do not experience Androgenetic Alopecia leads me to believe that they do not carry the balding gene, reguardless of the other possibly contributing factors that you mentioned. It is much more logical to suggest that they simply do not carry the balding gene, than to suggest that they do not display any of the other contributing facts that you mentioned. That is my opinion at least....

Study after study after study has shown that human scalp hair follicles (and even those of stumptailed macaques!) are sensitive to androgens. It would be a simply ASTONISHING development if scientists found out that American Indians, out of all other humans on the planet Earth, had _somehow_ managed to avoid ever getting that mutation! I think it would be about as shocking as finding some deserted island in the Pacific on which dinosaurs still lived!

 

[armandein]

so it boils down to theoretical logic....

Yes all is theoretical logic, but in the issue of male pattern baldness, the word key is the P,"Pattern", why all the suposesd balding genes affect at only certains scalp hairs? Which are the advantage in evolution issues?

 

[armandein]

You have faith in your theory, and I have faith in mine, while it is convenient for you to claim that Native Americans do carry the balding, it seems oubvious that they do not. Seriously? They have lower 5 Alpha reductase levels? Come on man, you can do better than that!

Do you believe that the scalp hair of American Indians is actually stimulated by androgens?

Yes in my opinion, healthy scalp hairs in American Indians are stimulated by androgens, they have operative 2 alfareductases. But, anormal nevels of androgens can distort the homeostasis in pilosebaceous unit and promote alterations in hair cycle with miniaturitation or hair loss.

All are theories, but the experiment are useful, sebutape etc,. BTW How we can measure the sensivity to androgens?

 

[freakout]

Biochemistry alone cannot explain the patterns. It falls under human phyiological mechanisms.

 

[Cassin]

Virtually every 'opinion' I posted is Mercado's. It is all that I am allowed to post. It's also a small fraction of what you'll find in his book.

Please explain this further.

What do you mean all that you are allowed to post? Under whose guidelines/permission are you posting? Are you employed by him?