- Reaction score
- 1,004
Any ideas?
Food For Thought. No Advance Of Bald Areas
- Thread starter Armando Jose
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bald areas detention
Any ideas?
- Reaction score
- 594
He's NW7, and that stage you can't recede anymore, all you can do is thin diffusely in what little you have left
- Reaction score
- 1,004
Yes, We know that it can't recede anymore, but wich is the reason? sensitivity of AR's?
and why thin diffusely hair with less DHT and T?
- Reaction score
- 1,004
This is a also my friend Vicente
When he reached the maximum of bald area?
Also exist a less hair density in the top.
When he reached the maximum of bald area?
Also exist a less hair density in the top.
- Reaction score
- 594
Well that's how it all starts I suppose, give him time and even his NW7 tonsure might shrink if that thinning continues.
One idea is that hair follicles have some resistance to DHT, but as their telomeres get eroded away with repeated cell divisions, this resistance is lost. Maybe the telomeres on top are shorter and the back and sides are longer, but even then, they will eventuall disappear. This is the fundamental question regarding hair loss, why is the back resistant?
Other theories are due to scalp calcification, similar to heart disease (do male pattern baldness sufferers have heart disease in their family? My NW6 early onset MOB grandad does for sure). Then there's this scalp thinning hypothesis.
Your guess is as good as mine.
One idea is that hair follicles have some resistance to DHT, but as their telomeres get eroded away with repeated cell divisions, this resistance is lost. Maybe the telomeres on top are shorter and the back and sides are longer, but even then, they will eventuall disappear. This is the fundamental question regarding hair loss, why is the back resistant?
Other theories are due to scalp calcification, similar to heart disease (do male pattern baldness sufferers have heart disease in their family? My NW6 early onset MOB grandad does for sure). Then there's this scalp thinning hypothesis.
Your guess is as good as mine.
- Reaction score
- 594
Your elderly friend has more hair than me, he just got lucky.
- Reaction score
- 950
Is the answer sebum?
- Reaction score
- 1,004
High resolution images
GoldeMane, the telomeres have an important role in aging, but have different telomeres in hair on top/sides in the teens, with a healthy hair?
- Reaction score
- 5,209
I've worked with FOUR old men in the past few months that have barely ANY density at all in their sides and lower back. they were only in their early 50's - early 60's... so, hair transplant's FTW? don't know about that. we will see how many people start losing their transplanted hairs in their 50's and 60's. My own Father's donor area is diffused thin.
- Reaction score
- 11,939
High resolution images
GoldeMane, the telomeres have an important role in aging, but have different telomeres in hair on top/sides in the teens, with a healthy hair?
If you had an even higher resolution image, you could see if units of 4-hairs have become units of 2-hairs, rather than units staying the same and there just being fewer of them.
The entire scalp is probably negatively affected by androgen exposure. In theory, if we lived long enough (and if our androgen levels remained moderately high long enough), we would probably ALL lose ALL our scalp hair.
That probably goes for women too.
The loss of hair density that occurs at 70+ years old may be different. That may just be the aging process in general. But I see no reason why "age-related thinning" from people's 20s-60s is not more Androgenetic Alopecia happening. Plenty of anti-androgen users report gaining density in the supposedly "non-balding" areas.
The difference between the "non-balding" and the "balding" areas of the scalp is probably just the degree of (genetic) androgen sensitivity. The non-balding areas are really balding too, they just take a lot longer.
The reason why a hairline might recede gradually is because the genetic androgen sensitivity "fades" gradually instead of having a sharp clear boundary between higher & lower sensitivities.
That probably goes for women too.
The loss of hair density that occurs at 70+ years old may be different. That may just be the aging process in general. But I see no reason why "age-related thinning" from people's 20s-60s is not more Androgenetic Alopecia happening. Plenty of anti-androgen users report gaining density in the supposedly "non-balding" areas.
The difference between the "non-balding" and the "balding" areas of the scalp is probably just the degree of (genetic) androgen sensitivity. The non-balding areas are really balding too, they just take a lot longer.
The reason why a hairline might recede gradually is because the genetic androgen sensitivity "fades" gradually instead of having a sharp clear boundary between higher & lower sensitivities.
RatherGoBlindThanSeeItGo
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 32
I think this is a reasonable explanation. My dad is 61 and has the same straight hairline he's always had, literally 0 recession, but his hair is getting thinner. Pretty sure it's not late-onset diffuse balding because the same is happening to his eyebrows and his legs (practically hairless on his legs). That's just aging, might be related to him having type-2 diabetes (he takes his meds though so he's perfectly healthy otherwise).
Just wanted to add to the photos that the first has
- lower resolution
- higher contrast/saturation which makes dark areas (like his black hair) look darker
- dry hair as opposed to wet hair on the second
Three things which are more flattering on the hair. Taking into account that hair thins with age (especially as it becomes more grey), I doubt that if his hair really thinned due to Androgenetic Alopecia, the amount is really negligible.
- Reaction score
- 533
Any ideas?
Its because if these people are prone to hair-loss in those areas to some extent. Like the neck area and around the ears is an area that start to thin and recede as well. Look at people who have no hair-loss at all at an old age and then do not share the same patter of thinning. So obviously the answer isnt related to age, its related to exposure to androgens of a long period of time.
But people with serious Androgenetic Alopecia (high norwoods) tend to see more "donor thinning" in the back/sides than average.
The thing is, most of us have a pretty high Norwood level programmed in. Not always Norwood#7 but usually Norwood#5-7. I'm talking about even some guys who never go past Norwood#2 or #3, they still might have the higher pattern programmed in. (If you jacked them full of androgens for years, then what loss pattern might emerge? Probably a bigger one. Which means it was always there, lurking, but not naturally fueled.) Men don't all reach the high Norwood levels because baldness is the result of several factors. A genetic Norwood pattern. An amount of genetic susceptibility. A natural androgen level.
The point is that guys with very high Norwood levels are probably combinations of things. Not only high Norwood patterns, but also high general androgen susceptibilities & androgen levels as well. The latter two factors will have some effect on the "donor area" horseshoe as well as the obviously balding areas.
See if you can find a shiny-top Norwood#7 whose donor horseshoe looks every bit as thick as the donor horseshoe on a guy with a great Norwood#1. It's not easy.
It's all one more reason why guys with high Norwoods in their future should probably not be getting transplants.
The thing is, most of us have a pretty high Norwood level programmed in. Not always Norwood#7 but usually Norwood#5-7. I'm talking about even some guys who never go past Norwood#2 or #3, they still might have the higher pattern programmed in. (If you jacked them full of androgens for years, then what loss pattern might emerge? Probably a bigger one. Which means it was always there, lurking, but not naturally fueled.) Men don't all reach the high Norwood levels because baldness is the result of several factors. A genetic Norwood pattern. An amount of genetic susceptibility. A natural androgen level.
The point is that guys with very high Norwood levels are probably combinations of things. Not only high Norwood patterns, but also high general androgen susceptibilities & androgen levels as well. The latter two factors will have some effect on the "donor area" horseshoe as well as the obviously balding areas.
See if you can find a shiny-top Norwood#7 whose donor horseshoe looks every bit as thick as the donor horseshoe on a guy with a great Norwood#1. It's not easy.
It's all one more reason why guys with high Norwoods in their future should probably not be getting transplants.