Theory: Cooked Fat =DHT(Dihydrotestosterone) Baldness

[DammitLetMeIn]

you still have no clue as the cause of male pattern baldness, no fing clue:

On the contrary, its because of genes + diet. No need to swear btw. Its unnecessary.

we told you about the androgen receptors

As I recall, you didn't know much about the androgen receptors. You only knew of the very basics, about which I was already well aware. And you shouldn't speak for others.

and their predisposition androgen sensitivity

I asked for someone else to elaborate further upon that (as you blatantly couldn't) and no one had anything to offer. I'm willing to listen, I am not close-minded, unlike some.

, but whatever, we just like arguing with you:

Actually, it doesn't seem you 'like' 'arguing' at all. You seem uptight, insecure and slightly intimidated by an alternative viewpoint. Also, I don't see it as an argument, I see it as an informative debate. You appear to treat it like a personal battle/vendetta, which is regretful. Moreover, once again, you shouldn't speak for others.

because everything you say it either proven untrue,:

This isn't accurate.

and the you have to change your theory yet again, like when we told you about male pattern baldness in apes:

It is a long time since we were apes.

tell me again how you are not an ape too :roll:

No problem. I'm not an ape, I'm a human.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Still wrong.

Surely you have something more insightful to offer than that.

 

[bubka]

again, you refute the genetic evidence which blows your theory apart,

It doesn't./quote]

this is the LAST TIME i am going to say this, apes go bald, long before they ate mccdonalds

The American Indians didn't have it. The Eskimos didn't have it. I was even reading studies on this earlier. Didn't they evolve from apes?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROOF OF THIS... oh wait never mind, YOU HAVE YET TO POST IT

too much pasta high fructose corn syrup bread for this native american

too much bread

drank lots of coca cola

discoved sugar cane and brought it to his tribe

guilty of all of the above

up next, bald eskimos, and bald pre WWII japanese

 

[bubka]

this is fun...

too much eskimo pie

cooked his seal fat too much

you do know that native americans and eastern asains are very similar too right?

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

I honestly haven't had time to search for the references. I've been researching insulin.

LOL you love your pictures. They all have hair as far as I can see.

I did read this earlier though:

Tidbits: Balding in Indians and Asians
Posted: January 5 2006, 1:52 pm PT | Categories: Tidbits

A few times each month, I will post some random hair-related information, which I’m calling “tidbitsâ€￾. I spend hours each day writing responses to questions I receive on this blog, so it is a nice change of pace. For example…


The American Indian (or Native American, if you prefer) has no genetic balding if their ancestry is from the Alaskan Bridge. American Indians that came to North America from Central America can have genetic balding. There has been no explanation why the American Indian does not have genetic balding, making him unique amongst all men (except those born with genetic defects in the DHT making enzyme or those who eat large amounts of DHT blockers in their diets, a group of primative people from the Central American rain forest).

The observation that men from Asia, India, or China have less balding is certainly not a reality today where the wig business is thriving. A theory put forward by Dr. Masumi Inaba in his 1996 book “Androgenetic Alopeciaâ€￾ claimed that there was more baldness in the post WWII Japanese men than in the earlier generation to which he belonged. I think that he attributed this to dietary change and in particular, to more saturated fat in the Japanese diet. The same theory, if true, could apply to Indians, who have only a small meat intake back in India (strict Hindus eat no meat at all). Dr. Inaba’s theory never gained any credence then or since, but history shows that if his theories are proven correct, he would not be the first scientist to be proven right a decade or more after his death.

Try actually reading it. And not just picking out the bit you want to throw in my face (for some unknown reason). It was written by Rasman I do believe - a well known hiar specialist (with more knowledge than some people).

http://www.baldingblog.com/2006/01/05/t ... nd-asians/

 

[docj077]

Still wrong.

Surely you have something more insightful to offer than that.

Nope. I've posted my evidence and it deals with a cohort that has internal and external validity. Something that none of your studies possesses. The large population size trumps anything you've posted and I refuse to accept any argument that you bring forth from now on.

In fact, I refuse to accept anything that you post on these forums from now on. It's not worth debating with someone that is afraid to admit that what they think is true is not true at all, but simply linked. There are many correlations within the disease sprectrum of mankind. That doesn't mean that what is correlated is the cause. Especially, when a disease is multifactorial like male pattern baldness. I just pray that you don't go into any scientific field, because I'd rather have trained monkeys in the lab and researching male pattern baldness. They'd get more accomplished.

 

[bubka]

but according to DammitLetMeIn, monkeys only experience male pattern baldness from starving, it is not their diet

i love when people site sources with blogs, thats so scientific

DammitLetMeIn: everyone knows to have a scientific study, your sample size has to be significant in representing the population, otherwise it is totally not substaintial

its like flipping a coin only 10 times, and you get heads 8 times, so of course a coin will always be heads 80%... go study some statistics now while you are at it, and some evolution too because you still don't get it

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

Nope. I've posted my evidence and it deals with a cohort that has internal and external validity. Something that none of your studies possesses. The large population size trumps anything you've posted and I refuse to accept any argument that you bring forth from now on. .

So you are also refusing to accept that balding is a marker of aging and that insulin is the major player in the aging process.

In fact, I refuse to accept anything that you post on these forums from now on.

Thats your prerogative. I have never actually asked you to 'accept' anything, I have only ever asked for a viewpoint which up until now you have provided and it has been informative.

It's not worth debating with someone that is afraid to admit that what they think is true is not true at all, but simply linked.

But the link is strong enough and consistent enough in my mind to be of influential consequence to the baldning process.

When added to the knowledge I have personally garnered about the pervading influence of insulin in aging over the years, I feel confident enough to draw the conclusions I do. I dont expect you to share them.

There are many correlations within the disease sprectrum of mankind. That doesn't mean that what is correlated is the cause.

Yes, but I feel insulin is a special case. Its wide-ranging influence is so important in human aging that its link to baldness is so logical and likely by deduction to be so influential.

Especially, when a disease is multifactorial like male pattern baldness. .[quote:1fdfc]

Indeed, there are a number of factors at play.

I just pray that you don't go into any scientific field.[quote:1fdfc]

You're safe on that score. I don't need to go into any such thing.

because I'd rather have trained monkeys in the lab and researching male pattern baldness. They'd get more accomplished.

[/quote:1fdfc][/quote:1fdfc]

Well, according to Bubka we're all monkeys. But by the same token you must accept that Western Medicine in all its years of existence has not come up with a cure for male pattern baldness. Thats hundreds of years. In this area they have consistently come up short so I feel that an alternative approach or perspective upon the situation is very much justified.

 

[bubka]

there are no cures for genetic based diseases, only treatments, again you do not understand male pattern baldness

gene therapy is not yet a reality

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

but according to DammitLetMeIn, monkeys only experience male pattern baldness from starving, it is not their diet

Imo, they can either experience balding by one of three ways:

1.) They starve so their body releases DHT and this attaches to their hair follicles (much like a human).

2.) They spike their insulin or are fed too much (at a particular time in their life) - much like a human.

3.) It is a survival of the fittest mechanism whereby the monkey with the biggest bald head (like the macaque ape or the ukaru monkey) scares his competitiors and mates with the female. Thereby it is firmly hardwired into his genetics to the point where they are bald even before puberty.

i love when people site sources with blogs, thats so scientific

Firstly, they 'cite' blogs not 'site' them, but Rassman is a major player in the hair loss/balding/ transplant game. He has been writing and researching weekly for many many years. If he says something, I'm more inclined to believe it than not.

You asked for evidence, I provided you with an expert who stated it. You still won't accept it and I don't suppose you ever will. But get this: original american indians didn't go bald.

DammitLetMeIn: everyone knows to have a scientific study, your sample size has to be significant in representing the population, otherwise it is totally not substaintial

well, where there is more than one study, and there is anecdotal evidence and corresponding science then I am inclined to believe it. Not saying its cast-iron but i'm inclined to believe it.

its like flipping a coin only 10 times, and you get heads 8 times, so of course a coin will always be heads 80%

Be aware, that its NOTHING like flipping a coin. thats a terrible analogy. these are real people and real experiments we're talking about.

go study some statistics now while you are at it

I will get you the stats/concrete evidence as soon as I get the time.

and some evolution too because you still don't get it

I get evolution perfectly. I just disagree with the way in which you have attempted to interpret it.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

there are no cures for genetic based diseases

While there is a strong genetic element, men do not go bald before puberty. I have already posted articles about how diet can cause genetic expression.

If you're saying baldness is a genetic based disease, then by that token, all bald men are diseased and all native american indians are disease free - I don't believe that.

only treatments, again you do not understand male pattern baldness

I understand your view on it perfectly, but I don't agree with it.

gene therapy is not yet a reality

In a way it is, if you factor in the ability of food to turn on and off genetic switches.

 

[SkylineGTR]

wow i love how there were posted pictures that clearly show natives and eskimo's far down the norwood scale and all he can say is "well they have hair"

Seriously dude your trying to argue a point that so far has only concluded that

being bald puts you at a higher risk for these things... not that these things cause you to go bald.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

wow i love how there were posted pictures that clearly show natives and eskimo's far down the norwood scale and all he can say is "well they have hair".

Yeah, that response was too curt. Those photos (being in color mostly) are no doubt of modern indians on a modern diet and not the original indians.

But what is worthy about your point is that I haven't provided MUCH evidence that Native Indians/ Eskimos didn't bald, and that is something which I shall endeavour to do.

Seriously dude your trying to argue a point that so far has only concluded that being bald puts you at a higher risk for these things... not that these things cause you to go bald.

So you really think the baldness comes first? You think that the baldness causes these conditions?

Imo, you've got it back to front.

 

[sublime]

but according to DammitLetMeIn, monkeys only experience male pattern baldness from starving, it is not their diet

i love when people site sources with blogs, thats so scientific

DammitLetMeIn: everyone knows to have a scientific study, your sample size has to be significant in representing the population, otherwise it is totally not substaintial

its like flipping a coin only 10 times, and you get heads 8 times, so of course a coin will always be heads 80%... go study some statistics now while you are at it, and some evolution too because you still don't get it

If anyone is interested in poor diet with animals you should look into Pottingers Study on cats. And just because you are eating food does not mean you are digesting it properly, it is not what you eat but what you can digest. And is it genetic or is poor nutritional health from your parents which made you succeptable to the maladies of today. (Of course it could be considered the same thing but most scientists discount the role of diet by any means.)


Study information:
"Group A cats were fed raw meat. Their first generation remained healthy. 2nd, 3rd, & 4th generations also remained healthy. Group B cats, which were fed raw milk, their first generation remained healthy. 2nd, 3rd, & 4th generations also remained healthy. Group C cats, which were fed pasteurized milk, group D evaporated milk, and group E condensed milk and cooked foods. All first generations of C, D & E developed diseases and illnesses near the end of their lifespan. Their second generations developed diseases and illnesses in the middle of their life span. Their third generations developed diseases and illnesses in beginning of life, and many died before six months of age. No fourth generations were produced; either third generation parents were sterile, or fourth generation cats were spontaneously aborted before birth."

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

If anyone is interested in poor diet with animals you should look into Pottingers Study on cats. And just because you are eating food does not mean you are digesting it properly, it is not what you eat but what you can digest. And is it genetic or is poor nutritional health from your parents which made you succeptable to the maladies of today. (Of course it could be considered the same thing but most scientists discount the role of diet by any means.)


Study information:
"Group A cats were fed raw meat. Their first generation remained healthy. 2nd, 3rd, & 4th generations also remained healthy. Group B cats, which were fed raw milk, their first generation remained healthy. 2nd, 3rd, & 4th generations also remained healthy. Group C cats, which were fed pasteurized milk, group D evaporated milk, and group E condensed milk and cooked foods. All first generations of C, D & E developed diseases and illnesses near the end of their lifespan. Their second generations developed diseases and illnesses in the middle of their life span. Their third generations developed diseases and illnesses in beginning of life, and many died before six months of age. No fourth generations were produced; either third generation parents were sterile, or fourth generation cats were spontaneously aborted before birth."

I am aware of Pottenger cat studies. I rate them very highly, alongside Weston Price's research. Good post.

 

[SkylineGTR]

the main catalyst for balding men is DHT. This has been proven.

This isn't a case of which came first the chicken or the egg.

When your genetically susceptible to baldness then your hormones are out of whack and in turn make you susceptible to other things.

Everything that you've shown and even the articles lean towards this.

Otherwise the conclusions would be "xxx potentially causes baldness" not "bald men show more/less xxx then non balding" they already know we are out of whack and are just trying to show how out of whack we really are.

 

[DammitLetMeIn]

the main catalyst for balding men is DHT. This has been proven.

This isn't a case of which came first the chicken or the egg.

When your genetically susceptible to baldness then your hormones are out of whack and in turn make you susceptible to other things.

Everything that you've shown and even the articles lean towards this.

Otherwise the conclusions would be "xxx potentially causes baldness" not "bald men show more/less xxx then non balding" they already know we are out of whack and are just trying to show how out of whack we really are.

I agree with you, but I am interested in what makes your 'hormones out of whack'.

Hormonal imblance is not genetic imo. It has to be regulated/influenced by other factors.

 

[SkylineGTR]

if that were the case women wouldn't PMS or go through menopause because they could simply control it.

Boys wouldn't go though puberty etc...

 

[bobmer]

Androgenetic Alopecia Unraveled
The Last Book on the Prevention of Hair Loss

In Japan, incidents of pattern hair loss increased when the Americans ruled after World War II. The US forces instituted wholesale changes on Japanese society in a level unheard of in modern times. It was theorized that Western food contributed to pattern hair loss but further studies negated the theory.

Humans live in overhauled environments today - a great leap away from the primal environment lasting many millions of years to a sudden change that occurred during the ... It is the propensity of humans of putting themselves in hostile environments that is causing disorders.

Pattern hair loss is found to correlate with a number of diseases involving the cardiovascular system. Pattern hair loss is on the rise in industrializing areas. This means that a hostile condition that affects the cardiovascular system was introduced in our man-made environment and is lurking at a very close proximity to its victim.

http://unraveled.bravenet.com/

 

[wookster]

http://www.umm.edu/altmed/ConsSupplemen ... idscs.html

Lack of omega-6 fatty acids, however, is extremely rare in diets of those living in certain Western countries, particularly the United States, as well as Israel. In fact, North American and Israeli diets tend to have too much omega-6, particularly in relation to omega-3 fatty acids. This imbalance contributes to long-term diseases such as heart disease, cancer, asthma, arthritis, and depression. For optimum health and disease prevention, the balance should consist of one to four times more omega-6 fatty acids than omega-3 fatty acids. A typical American diet, however, tends to contain 11 to 30 times more omega-6 than omega-3 fatty acids.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/hopes/tre ... lm/i5.html

In a diet low in omega-3 fatty acids, large quantities of delta-5 desaturase enzymes are available to convert DGLA into AA. The available AA is then converted into the inflammatory PG2. Thus, the more omega-3 fatty acids present in our body, the fewer enzymes are available for converting omega-6 fatty acids into the inflammatory prostaglandins. A balance of omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids is therefore essential for proper health. However, the typical Western diet has evolved to be high in omega-6 and low in omega-3 fatty acids. While omega-6 fatty acids are not necessarily bad, a skewed ratio in favor of too much omega-6 can be detrimental to one’s health.

One last note about essential fatty acids concerns their relationship with vitamin E. Some studies have reported that there is a significant correlation between vitamin E and omega-3 fatty acid supplementation. Findings suggest that an inadequate intake of vitamin E results in a decreased absorption of omega-3. Hence, some experts suggest that vitamin E supplementation may be helpful in conjunction with omega-3 supplementation. (Wander, et al.)

http://www.gourmetstylewellness.com/newsletter/ ... le&sid=253

In Conclusion

Some say Androgenetic Alopecia and inflammation are inextricably linked and part of the same problem. Some say they are two separate conditions but often found together in the same person because they are so common. Some say inflammation is a primary cause of hair loss and others say the inflammation is just a secondary response to something else that is causing the hair loss. This is all very confusing and the scientific evidence to prove who is right and who is wrong is not likely to be produced for a long time. However, if you have hair loss and scalp irritation together it makes sense to look into reducing scalp inflammation. No one can say for sure if it will really help hair growth but it should do no harm. Is it possible that eliminating scalp irritation might stop hair loss completely for a while? – possibly!