S Foote.
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 67
The OP asked "Is The Cure For This Disease Anywhere Close? "
Not according to the widely accepted science, in the peer reviewed papers about in-vivo tissue growth controls. According to the accepted scientific norm here, hair follicle growth restriction research, is failing to take account of a basic growth control that must play a central role.
http://phys.org/news/2014-04-room-tissue-growth-cell-response.html
Non of the treatments currently being researched, are capable of getting around this growth control in the "actual" conditions of the balding Human scalp. If you consider the only study that demonstrated a significant re-enlargement of "Human" male pattern baldness follicles, this clearly demonstrates that these follicles have the built in ability to re-enlarge, given the right "external" conditions. This is the immuno mouse Human transplantation study, many here are aware of.
http://www.jaad.org/article/S0190-9622(02)61499-9/pdf
If nothing else, this study indicates that the cell based treatments intended to grow androgen "immune" follicles, are pointless and will fail to produce large follicles in the Human situation, as they have consistantly failed to do in many years of trying.
In my opinion, the concentration upon molecular and genetic studies alone can be very misleading. You always should consider the context in which biology/physiology actually functions. However the genes act to produce structures, these structures cannot defy the laws of physics! Often you dont need to know whats happening at the molecullar level, to understand a process of change. This I suggest is a case in point.
When you consider the principles involved in the external pressure based spatial growth controls linked above, against the accepted data in changes in hair growth, it becomes clear that this control is the common factor here.
I have challenged many scientists in hair research and general physiology, to go on the record and deny this major flaw in the current hair loss research, I just get a no comment. I have just made the same challenge to the organisers and scientists involved in the up coming conference in Japan.
If there are any scientists out there who are willing to go on the record, and deny this flaw in the current hair loss research, I would like to hear what they have to say?
Dont shoot the messenger here. Anyone can read the peer reviewed papers about tissue growth controls in-vivo, and see the flaw in current hair follicle miniaturisation research for thenselves.
Not according to the widely accepted science, in the peer reviewed papers about in-vivo tissue growth controls. According to the accepted scientific norm here, hair follicle growth restriction research, is failing to take account of a basic growth control that must play a central role.
http://phys.org/news/2014-04-room-tissue-growth-cell-response.html
Non of the treatments currently being researched, are capable of getting around this growth control in the "actual" conditions of the balding Human scalp. If you consider the only study that demonstrated a significant re-enlargement of "Human" male pattern baldness follicles, this clearly demonstrates that these follicles have the built in ability to re-enlarge, given the right "external" conditions. This is the immuno mouse Human transplantation study, many here are aware of.
http://www.jaad.org/article/S0190-9622(02)61499-9/pdf
If nothing else, this study indicates that the cell based treatments intended to grow androgen "immune" follicles, are pointless and will fail to produce large follicles in the Human situation, as they have consistantly failed to do in many years of trying.
In my opinion, the concentration upon molecular and genetic studies alone can be very misleading. You always should consider the context in which biology/physiology actually functions. However the genes act to produce structures, these structures cannot defy the laws of physics! Often you dont need to know whats happening at the molecullar level, to understand a process of change. This I suggest is a case in point.
When you consider the principles involved in the external pressure based spatial growth controls linked above, against the accepted data in changes in hair growth, it becomes clear that this control is the common factor here.
I have challenged many scientists in hair research and general physiology, to go on the record and deny this major flaw in the current hair loss research, I just get a no comment. I have just made the same challenge to the organisers and scientists involved in the up coming conference in Japan.
If there are any scientists out there who are willing to go on the record, and deny this flaw in the current hair loss research, I would like to hear what they have to say?
Dont shoot the messenger here. Anyone can read the peer reviewed papers about tissue growth controls in-vivo, and see the flaw in current hair follicle miniaturisation research for thenselves.
