So look ok, WHAT changes as we age to trigger hair loss?

[Hoppi]

Hm, the theory on another site comes back to "bad" estrogen again. This idea that as we get older, the body has less testosterone and more estradiol, and the estradiol then upregulates our androgen receptors. This fits with observations pretty much, but I'm not sure if it's true yet.

 

[Bryan]

Ok, that also makes sense but what about the purpose? Why have we evolved to lose hair in this manner? Any current theories on this?

There have been a few different theories on hairloss sites about what caused balding to evolve; the one I personally like best is that it evolved to help cool the rapidly developing brains of primates.

 

[Bryan]

Hm, the theory on another site comes back to "bad" estrogen again. This idea that as we get older, the body has less testosterone and more estradiol, and the estradiol then upregulates our androgen receptors. This fits with observations pretty much, but I'm not sure if it's true yet.

Aside from the fact that that theory doesn't say anything about why balding evolved, I'd like to see some actual evidence that estrogen upregulates androgen receptors.

 

[Hoppi]

I'm glad you're open to it Bryan, but of course I understand you want to actually see the evidence! lol

Imagine if we could find some kind of logical trigger like that though - wouldn't that be wonderful? ^_^

Ok, I'll see if I can find a study

Hm, this is interesting, regardless of it's place in what I said before (remember, I am very, very much still learning about this!)

http://www.jbc.org/content/272/11/6838.short

Hm, I don't know if this has relevance either:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... archtype=a

http://ukpmc.ac.uk/articles/PMC1892114; ... 96FFE.jvm4


All very interesting, there are lots of similar bits and pieces. I wonder how this all fits together, if at all

 

[Bryan]

I'm glad you're open to it Bryan, but of course I understand you want to actually see the evidence! lol

Imagine if we could find some kind of logical trigger like that though - wouldn't that be wonderful? ^_^

Ok, I'll see if I can find a study

Hm, this is interesting, regardless of it's place in what I said before (remember, I am very, very much still learning about this!)

http://www.jbc.org/content/272/11/6838.short

There's nothing in that study which addresses the claim you made.

Hm, I don't know if this has relevance either:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... archtype=a

Nothing in that one, either.

http://ukpmc.ac.uk/articles/PMC1892114;jsessionid=ADBF5852AA47C6CC2AA06AAC09496FFE.jvm4

That one finally has something about estrogen stimulating the upregulation of the androgen receptor, but it's limited to the prostates of mice, and even then only under certain specific circumstances. You can't simply assume from that, that the same thing happens in human scalp hair follicle cells.

 

[Hoppi]

Thing is erm, the only related hormone I believe in the male body which actually climbs with age as opposed to falls or stays the same (that I'm aware of) is estradiol, and I do find that usually guys without male pattern baldness often seem to look healthy and fairly muscular, eat a good diet, etc - which suggests healthy T levels. This is observational though I know

Obviously things like cholesterol and insulin also often climb, but then both of those are also commonly linked to male pattern baldness (insulin because it depresses testosterone production and cholesterol because it.. I believe contains or accumulates dht?)

I believe studies that show the prostate reacting to estradiol (obviously in combination with testosterone and enlarging) exist, I'll take a look when I'm back on my pc

That study that shows estradiol can activate androgen receptors once bound with shbg is interesting though isnt it? Isnt that what misterE was saying? O.O

Ah here are some interesting studies I am finding when I basically just google "estradiol prostate" (no quotes):

http://www.pnas.org/content/91/12/5402.full.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC44003/


This kind of stuff spectacularly backs up what misterE was saying (and still says on another forum I am on) and does indicate that if estradiol plays a role in the sensitivity of the prostate, as the receptors are I believe very similar (also using 5ar2) then the hair follicles may be reacting to precisely the same hormonal shifts. It's all pretty fascinating

 

[imlosinit]

Not to divert the discussion, but does not our immunity change over time? My Doctor told me autoimmune responsivity can change and cause all sorts of ill effects.

 

[Hoppi]

Hm, possibly That's a separate potential factor though, but might be worth looking into

It doesn't explain the prostate size / male pattern baldness link though, or the weird way DHT stays static despite testosterone dropping.

 

[barcafan]

But if that's true, then why is it that prostate size and male pattern baldness have been shown to correlate in studies?

They correlate, but only superficially, in the sense that both are generally caused by an increase in androgenic stimulation after puberty; and even THAT correlation is weakened somewhat by differences in the increase in sensitivity to androgens that I mentioned earlier. I personally started balding only in my early 40's, whereas others can start balding as early as their teenage years.

Hoppi, I want you to understand the meanings of the words "endocrine", "paracrine", and "autocrine". You won't believe me if _I_ explain them to you, so please Google them; I'm sure Wiki has some good explanations for you! DHT (like from the prostate) doesn't have much of a role as an endocrine hormone, it's mainly an autocrine or paracrine androgen.

Here is the first result from a quick search I did myself:

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pa ... mones.html

•Endocrine action: the hormone is distributed in blood and binds to distant target cells.
•Paracrine action: the hormone acts locally by diffusing from its source to target cells in the neighborhood.
•Autocrine action: the hormone acts on the same cell that produced it.

Dht can only do its dirty work in an enviornemnt of estrogen when we're talking about the prostate.

 

[Hoppi]

Really barcafan? Do you believe that estrogen plays a role in this too? I am not sure the extent to which I believe it, but it does fit very well with what is observed in society, and usually my approach is if the observational evidence fits, it is usually then worth trying to do some research to determine if the actual studies back it up.

I wouldn't imagine this phenomena will be true for everyone. For example, teenage MPBers may have very low SHBG, meaning they have higher testosterone. Guys taking steroids will be increasing their testosterone, and therefore increasing conversion to DHT not due to androgen receptor sensitivity, but just due to the sheer amount of testosterone they are being pummeled with.

The idea is that in the bodies of women estrogen is of course not a problem, but then they do not have the same amount of testosterone to activate androgen receptors (and usually they also don't have the genetic susceptibility, as I believe... it's recessive on the Y chromosome. But I might be wrong there.)

 

[Bryan]

Thing is erm, the only related hormone I believe in the male body which actually climbs with age as opposed to falls or stays the same (that I'm aware of) is estradiol, and I do find that usually guys without male pattern baldness often seem to look healthy and fairly muscular, eat a good diet, etc - which suggests healthy T levels. This is observational though I know

Oh, you think "looking healthy" is associated with no male pattern baldness?

I believe studies that show the prostate reacting to estradiol (obviously in combination with testosterone and enlarging) exist, I'll take a look when I'm back on my pc

Why don't we stick to the subject at hand, which isn't the prostate?

That study that shows estradiol can activate androgen receptors once bound with shbg is interesting though isnt it? Isnt that what misterE was saying? O.O

Ah here are some interesting studies I am finding when I basically just google "estradiol prostate" (no quotes):

http://www.pnas.org/content/91/12/5402.full.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC44003/

This kind of stuff spectacularly backs up what misterE was saying (and still says on another forum I am on) and does indicate that if estradiol plays a role in the sensitivity of the prostate, as the receptors are I believe very similar (also using 5ar2) then the hair follicles may be reacting to precisely the same hormonal shifts. It's all pretty fascinating

But this site (gourmetstylewellness.com) isn't about PROSTATE issues, it's about HAIR issues, which aren't connected with the prostate. MisterE made a fool out of himself by assuming that prostate cells and hair follicle cells behave exactly the same way. They don't. The interest in prostate issues in the context of HAIR is a waste of time.

Let the record show that you still haven't provided any evidence that backs-up your claim about estrogen causing an upregulation of androgen receptors in hair follicles.

 

[Bryan]

It doesn't explain the prostate size / male pattern baldness link though...

There is no prostate size / male pattern baldness link, except in the very superficial sense that BPH and male pattern baldness both tend to get worse with age. But here's something else which also gets worse with age: WRINKLES. Do wrinkles somehow cause hair thinning and prostate problems? Do you see how silly all this is getting?

 

[Hoppi]

But don't hair follicles and the prostate both have androgen receptors with type 2 5-alpha reductase that react to testosterone and create DHT? That was my understanding...

Here is an article covering a study that correlates male pattern baldness and prostate size:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/190493.php


So erm, how is it that prostate androgen receptors or reaction to androgens differs from hair follicles?

It just all seems to make perfect sense...


I guess the real question comes down to how androgen receptors react to estradiol. It would be find some more studies about this

 

[Bryan]

But don't hair follicles and the prostate both have androgen receptors with type 2 5-alpha reductase that react to testosterone and create DHT? That was my understanding...

Of course hair follicles and the prostate both have androgen receptors and type 2 5a-reductase. But that doesn't mean that hair follicles and the prostate influence or cause problems with each other! Problems with hair follicles and the prostate have a common source which is androgenic stimulation, but that isn't the same thing as one causing the other.

Here is an article covering a study that correlates male pattern baldness and prostate size:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/190493.php

So erm, how is it that prostate androgen receptors or reaction to androgens differs from hair follicles? It just all seems to make perfect sense...

How does the prostate react to androgens? Answer: it gets bigger.
How do scalp hair follicles react to androgens? Answer: they get smaller.

I guess the real question comes down to how androgen receptors react to estradiol. It would be find some more studies about this

Remember, it has to be androgen receptors specifically from SCALP hair follicles. Good luck on finding any information about that. I've never found any information on whether or not they are upregulated by estrogen.

 

[Hoppi]

No no but, I'm not saying that the prostate enlarging is in any way causing male pattern baldness. I used to believe that, a while ago, as I used to believe that as the prostate enlarges, it spews out DHT. But now I understand that this is not the case, and the DHT simply builds up inside, in much the same way as it collects around hair follicles and builds up in their sebaceous glands.

What I am swaying towards now is the view that these androgen receptors in the prostate may gain or lose sensitivity according to the same stimuli as those in someone's hair follicles. This of course would explain the correlation of prostate size and male pattern baldness severity, and fits with the fact that both have androgen receptors with 5ar2. I would be very interested to hear if there is a large difference between the prostate ARs and follicular ARs that I am unaware of, but it does seem like they are the same or very similar in structure. Of course, the fact that one causes enlarging and the others cause miniaturization would in this line of thinking be related to the inner workings of the receptor, and not it's raw outward structure and quite probably not the regulation of it's sensitivity either.

Then if this is true that they have the same stimuli for increased sensitivity (be that genetic, hormonal or otherwise) the question then is what IS this thing that is stimulating them to change sensitivity or reaction to androgens? And that's where estradiol _may_ come in

 

[Bryan]

Of course, the fact that one causes enlarging and the others cause miniaturization would in this line of thinking be related to the inner workings of the receptor, and not it's raw outward structure and quite probably not the regulation of it's sensitivity either.

No, it has to do with the characteristics and responses of the cell which CONTAINS the androgen receptor, not the androgen receptor itself.

Then if this is true that they have the same stimuli for increased sensitivity (be that genetic, hormonal or otherwise) the question then is what IS this thing that is stimulating them to change sensitivity or reaction to androgens? And that's where estradiol _may_ come in

Why do you have such a hard-on for estrogen? :dunno: Why are you so convinced that estrogen is at the bottom of every bad effect in the body, and your every effort is some silly attempt to trace every bad thing back to it?

 

[Hoppi]

No, no it's not it's just that of course the initial suspicious thing is that estrogen is the only hormone in guys that actually climbs with age, and many feel it is connected to the enlarging of the prostate at the very least. I wonder if serum estradiol correlates with male pattern baldness in any way - that would be a useful study I think

 

[Bryan]

No, no it's not it's just that of course the initial suspicious thing is that estrogen is the only hormone in guys that actually climbs with age, and many feel it is connected to the enlarging of the prostate at the very least.

But as I've pointed out before, what about all the other things (like WRINKLES) that also climb with age?? Why are you focusing so intently on estrogen? What about all the teenagers that experience balding? Do you think THEY have high levels of estrogen? :dunno:

I wonder if serum estradiol correlates with male pattern baldness in any way - that would be a useful study I think

I think estrogen correlates with male pattern baldness, but not in the way you think! I think it correlates negatively with male pattern baldness. The scientific evidence that estrogen is good for scalp hair is rather overwhelming.

 

[Hoppi]

But you see the complication here is that the studies you direct us to regarding hair follicles and estrogen are conducted in vitro, not in vivo. No-one is saying I don't believe that estrogen by itself has any negative effect on a hair follicle, male or female. What people do say however is that "bad" estrogen (which as I understand is estradiol) may be the cause of androgen receptor upregulation (which of course is only a problem if androgens are actually present). Additionally, that study seems to back up misterE's view that estradiol can hitch a ride on SHBG and then latch onto androgen receptors.. it's all here I think:

http://www.jbc.org/content/272/11/6838.short


I mean of course, many things increase and change with age, but that's not to say that NONE of them are therefore responsible for male pattern baldness. And not everything correlates with the condition as well as prostate size does. I mean surely if a study can prove that estradiol is higher in men with male pattern baldness/enlarged prostates... then.. isn't that it? And if it disproves it, then I suppose that might be grounds for finding a new theory lol

As for teens, the thing is that again I'm not saying this estrogen model is necessarily true for everyone. People have varying degrees of genetic susceptibility I think, varying degrees of natural receptor sensitivity, and different lifestyles and diets which can increase testosterone and cause male pattern baldness that way I think (such as taking steroids).

The condition I believe is complex, but that doesn't mean it can't be taken apart and understood It could be a delicate balance of all the factors listed above!

 

[Bryan]

But you see the complication here is that the studies you direct us to regarding hair follicles and estrogen are conducted in vitro, not in vivo.

Some of them are in vitro, but definitely not all of them! At various times in the past (probably before you started posting here, which is probably why you haven't seen them), I've cited the various European studies and experiments, in which good results for male pattern baldness were obtained by giving patients various topical estrogen preparations. Those were definitely in vivo!

No-one is saying I don't believe that estrogen by itself has any negative effect on a hair follicle, male or female. What people do say however is that "bad" estrogen (which as I understand is estradiol) may be the cause of androgen receptor upregulation (which of course is only a problem if androgens are actually present).

And maybe it DOESN'T cause androgen receptor upregulation! Why are you going back to that topic yet again, when I've already demonstrated to you that you have no evidence that estrogen has such an effect in human scalp hair follicles? You can't just point to some questionable mouse experiment, and simply assume that that proves that the same thing happens in human scalp hair! That's TERRIBLE science!! :smack:

Additionally, that study seems to back up misterE's view that estradiol can hitch a ride on SHBG and then latch onto androgen receptors.. it's all here I think:

http://www.jbc.org/content/272/11/6838.short

I told misterE more than once that that effect only happens in PROSTATE cells! Both of you are wasting time by pointing to that effect, and claiming that the same thing happens in hair follicles. It doesn't.