What type of persons are more vulnerable to hairloss?

[Bryan]

My friend Bryan;

You don't answer my question regarding the role of androgens in common baldness if there exist in scalp hairs from early years of our existence.

What question is that?

And when are you going to answer the question that I posed to you before? Once again: how do you explain the fact that people without functional androgen receptors and no detectable sebum production (or very very little sebum production) have flourishing scalp hair?

 

[michael barry]

Alrighty Armando,

Just for kicks, I'll respond to all the BS you just put up (and by the way, you still haven't answered Bryan's question)...


Here goes,.............You wrote:

Dear Michael Barry;

You are a very clever guy, like Mr. Bryan, but I don’t understand why you try to demolish my unsophisticated and simple theory. Nobody knows, neither me, exactly what happen in common baldness, due probably to the extrem complexity of PILOSEBACEOUS unit. Curiously, in the history, all remedies for common baldness are suported by a theory. Do you remember circulations factors?, or better, suffocation of hair root?
Snake oils – Suffocation of hair roots
Trasplants – Donor dominance ...........(MIchael Barry)----Transplants would be the bomb for hairloss if you had more donor hair, the problem is that you dont have enough donor hair.................
Minoxidil – nutrientes ..............................growth stimulant, not enough
Finasteride – Androgenetic theory ................needs more DHT inhibition
Aminexil – Fibrosis /................................to little too late
Hedgedog – genetic ..................................Unsafe
Hair multiplicaction – steem cells .............HM will be the eventual "cure"

You say: The succes of finasteride invalide my theory.

And then, what are doing Curis, Intercytex, etc? You mention TGF-beta, PCK etc. Why if the finasteride is the solution? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Michael Barry here,.....this is why. Finasteride does not inhibit ALL DHT. You know that Armando, and dont act like you dont. Finas only inhibits about 85 percent of type two alpha five DHT. IF someone got on it BEFORE they started losing hair however, it might really be helpful longer.


REMEMBER Armando, castrates dont regrow much hair, they just stop losing it, whatever length it is. Dutasteride users probably regrow a little more hair than finas users do.




You say: Sebum backup does not cause baldness.

Sebum have androgens and sebaceous gland produce t and DHT. Then, what is your position? Do you agree with the current theory abous steroids? I don’t understand, you seem inconsistent.
And, please, read my theory (*) again, the first problem is not sebum backup but the interference in the travel of steem cells from the bulge area to dermal papilla.




You say: I think Armando is selling a baldness product with some old essential oils and topical anti-androgens and his marketing strategy is to tell bald men something that they long to hear (i.e.---it aint your faulty genetics making you bald) so that they will buy what he is selling instead of revivogen, crinagen, spironolactone, or whatever topical anti-androgen out there).

This is may bet. A topical and multifactorial product, and it is not for life. A type more sophisticated than revivogen which is applaude by someone.




You say: THE BLATANTLY OBVIOUS f****ing HAIR TRANSPLANT SUCCESSES that have hair growing thirty years after the plugs were put in, even after the hair around them falls out invalidate anything about sebum causing hairloss.

You know that trasplanted hairs are longer and with better attention than originals. And, what about body hair trasplant versus donor dominance? ===========================================================================================================Michael Barry again................what in the hell are you talking about transplanted hairs recieving "more attention"? Gary Hitzig, a transplant Doctor, had a hairtransplant back in the seventies. That hair is still growing strong up front.

Body hair transplants? they grow (weakly) because body hair usually isn't as robust as head hair and it has shorter growth cycles (even though they do get longer on the scalp in most cases). Body hair likes DHT, head hair does not like DHT and DHT makes it sick. Thats easy enough isn't it. Its donor dominance theory.




You say: Armando's trying to pad his retirement is all I can figure out. A lot of people in Spain are attempting to pad their retirements from what I can tell, as their birthrate is only 1.2 children per female, they will be a practically extinct people in less than 200 years if they dont start making some babies over there pretty soon. They are literally almost halving the size of each successive generation. You'd think Armando would be more worried about that instead of asserting an easily disprovable baldness theory.


OOHps, I don’t understand your idea, please, Are you mathematical?. OTOH In my family are five members, four women.


You say: Transplants alone wreck Armando's theory.

Are you sure?? Yes, very sure...............................



Please Michael, two times in this post I asked Bryan one thing about androgens in scalp hairs before puberty. Have you any idea? .........................................Yes, of course boys have a little testosterone, but not NEARLY as much as a grown man has, and not enough to kick off baldness genetics.


WRONG alterna baldness theories dont do any one of these young men favors Armando. They simply keep people from perusing successful treatments like topical spironolactone, finas, minoxidil, peptides, proanthocyandinds, ketoconazole, retin-a

 

[Bryan]

LOUD SILENCE from Armando, who pops-up from time to time to make weird claims like "without sebum, there is no hair", but never sticks around very long to defend them. Is he UNABLE to defend those claims? :wink:

 

[Armando Jose]

There is a plenty of studies talking about sebaceous gland and hair but It seems that are unuseles?? An example.

Regulation of Human Sebaceous Glands
Diane Thiboutot, MD, Associate Professor of Dermatology
The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine
The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania

In the human fetus, sebaceous glands
develop in the 13th to 16th week of gestation from the
most superficial bulges on the developing hair follicles.
When fully formed, the glands remain attached to the
hair follicles by a duct through which sebum flows into
the follicular canal and onto the skin surface. Sebaceous
glands are found associated with hair follicles all over the
body. Only the palms and soles, which have no hair
follicles, are totally devoid of sebaceous glands.


Armando

 

[Armando Jose]

Bryan,
Do you really think that nature is squanderer?
Do you think that evolution develop a very complex system, including stem cells, neurons, HPA axis etc, with no reason or important cause?
Do you think that pilosebaceous unit, and especially sebum, is useless?

The answer is clearly NOT, and sebaceous gland form part of this system.
Real scientist doesn’t rule out the action of sebaceous gland in hair loss.
If they are looking at only other angle is due to its incapability or eyes closed.

In this forum exist very clever guys, like you, but if you persist saying that sebaceous gland have no any role in hair loss biology, I’ll have to change my list.

Have a nice day

Armando

 

[Pondle]

There is a plenty of studies talking about sebaceous gland and hair but It seems that are unuseles?? An example.

Regulation of Human Sebaceous Glands
Diane Thiboutot, MD, Associate Professor of Dermatology
The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine
The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania

In the human fetus, sebaceous glands
develop in the 13th to 16th week of gestation from the
most superficial bulges on the developing hair follicles.
When fully formed, the glands remain attached to the
hair follicles by a duct through which sebum flows into
the follicular canal and onto the skin surface. Sebaceous
glands are found associated with hair follicles all over the
body. Only the palms and soles, which have no hair
follicles, are totally devoid of sebaceous glands.


Armando

I don't think this tells us anything about male pattern baldness, Armando. I think it's well established that androgens cause hair loss. We know that eunuchs don't go bald. Experiments conducted since the 1940s have proved that if you inject some castrates (or male to female transexuals) with enough testosterone, they will develop male pattern baldness. Equally, we know that 5AR deficient intersexuals don't develop male pattern baldness, and that 5ARI drugs can halt balding in most men. Case closed?

 

[Armando Jose]

Pondle;

If you have not any doubt about current androGENETIC theory, it is good for you.

I have no real proof about different genetic hairs in scalp, and It is possible that androgens exist in scalp hairs from early years of our existence. Then, you'll understand my interest.

Armando

 

[Pondle]

Pondle;

If you have not any doubt about current androGENETIC theory, it is good for you.

I have no real proof about different genetic hairs in scalp, and It is possible that androgens exist in scalp hairs from early years of our existence. Then, you'll understand my interest.

Armando

But Armando, doesn't androgen production accelerate rapidly in puberty? No-one goes bald before puberty, although some men start to go bald almost immediately after it.

 

[hair today gone tomorrow]

Pondle;

If you have not any doubt about current androGENETIC theory, it is good for you.

I have no real proof about different genetic hairs in scalp, and It is possible that androgens exist in scalp hairs from early years of our existence. Then, you'll understand my interest.

Armando

Early years of OUR EXISTENCE? you mean humanity's existence? Are you saying that our ancestor's didnt bald?

 

[Bryan]

There is a plenty of studies talking about sebaceous gland and hair but It seems that are unuseles?? An example.

Regulation of Human Sebaceous Glands
Diane Thiboutot, MD, Associate Professor of Dermatology
The Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine
The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania

In the human fetus, sebaceous glands develop in the 13th to 16th week of gestation from the most superficial bulges on the developing hair follicles. When fully formed, the glands remain attached to the hair follicles by a duct through which sebum flows into the follicular canal and onto the skin surface. Sebaceous glands are found associated with hair follicles all over the body. Only the palms and soles, which have no hair follicles, are totally devoid of sebaceous glands.

Where in that paragraph does it suggest that "without sebum, there is no hair"??

Armando, you're confusing the issue of the purpose of sebum with your own wild claim that sebum is necessary for hair growth. While I suppose we can't be absolutely certain that sebum no longer has any real function at all in modern man, nevertheless, I think we can safely dispense with your wild claim about sebum being necessary for hair. You haven't yet come up with even one iota of evidence for that, and you continue to ignore the evidence of the subjects with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome.

 

[Bryan]

Bryan,
Do you really think that nature is squanderer?

Yes, I think sometimes it is.

Do you think that evolution develop a very complex system, including stem cells, neurons, HPA axis etc, with no reason or important cause?

No I don't. Not those specific things you mentioned.

Do you think that pilosebaceous unit, and especially sebum, is useless?

Yes, I think sebum is probably useless, and so does Kligman. Have you read his old article "The Uses of Sebum"?

The answer is clearly NOT, and sebaceous gland form part of this system.
Real scientist doesn’t rule out the action of sebaceous gland in hair loss.
If they are looking at only other angle is due to its incapability or eyes closed.

Real scientists acknowledge SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, which you haven't done.

In this forum exist very clever guys, like you, but if you persist saying that sebaceous gland have no any role in hair loss biology, I’ll have to change my list.

Why don't you really surprise all of us and try to find some SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE supporting your claim?

 

[Bryan]

I have no real proof about different genetic hairs in scalp...

How do you explain donor dominance?

 

[Armando Jose]

Pondle:
But Armando, doesn't androgen production accelerate rapidly in puberty? No-one goes bald before puberty, although some men start to go bald almost immediately after it.

Androgenetic alopecia in children: report of 20 cases.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... med_docsum


How do you explain donor dominance?

Does the recipient site influence the hair growth characteristics in hair transplantation?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/quer ... med_docsum

Armando

 

[Bryan]

How do you explain donor dominance?

Does the recipient site influence the hair growth characteristics in hair transplantation?

Yes it does, apparently, but androgenetic alopecia itself demonstrates donor dominance. I ask you again: how do you explain that?

 

[Armando Jose]

My friend Bryan;

You know very well that all healthy scalp hairs are equals, then, why I have to explain donor dominance between these hairs?



Armando

 

[Bryan]

You have to explain donor dominance because you said before that you dont believe that there is any genetic difference between one scalp hair follicle and another. So let's hear it, Armando. How do you explain it?

 

[michael barry]

Armando wrote:

"My friend Bryan;

You know very well that all healthy scalp hairs are equals, then, why I have to explain donor dominance between these hairs?"


Armdando....................give me a break!!!!!!!

We can move hairs from the back of the head to the front and they grow and will continue to grow for the rest of a persons life if done correctly. They dont bald. Since the sebaceous glands are moved with them, and hardly anyone who gets transplants wears their hair really long, why dont they miniaturize too after several years? They dont have a problem eliminating sebum and their growth isn't affected. They are no longer resting on pillows at night, so thats "out" as an explanation. There is a difference in the HAIRS themselves apparently, unless you agree with Stephen Foote's theory that tissue pressure around hairs causes miniaturization, and the hair plugs are protected by the scar tissue created around them during healing.




Armando, have you ever noticed that in the hippocratic wreath, the hair units usually contain 3-4 hairs and the hairs on top of the head in the vertex and front are usually in 1-2 hair units? Ever look at a guy who IS JUST STARTING TO BALD, but still has hair all over his head, and notice that you can see a "line" where his hair gets thicker in the back, which will correspond exactly where his hippocratic wreath is going to be?

 

[Armando Jose]

My friends Michael and Bryan;

Are you agree that scalp reduction is the best "hair trasplant"? There is not injuries at all and we change only the position of scalp hairs.

Do you want ask Mr. Foote for its results?



OTOH, sebaceous gland is vital for hair, A evidence: transplatation of only hair is a mistake, Only works follicular unity trasplantation including sebaceous gland.


And finally, Probe us the "suppossed" genetical differences in healthy scalp hairs.

Armando

 

[michael barry]

Armando wrote:


"My friends Michael and Bryan;

Are you agree that scalp reduction is the best "hair trasplant"? There is not injuries at all and we change only the position of scalp hairs.

Do you want ask Mr. Foote for its results?



.


And finally, Probe us the "suppossed" genetical differences in healthy scalp hairs.

Armando"




Scalp reductions stretch the skin badly, often resulting in a death of skin under the hair and purple dead skin. Scalp reductions also just pull skin and stretch it upwards and forewards-------------------but neglects that the hippocratic wreath itself is still shrinking if the man is not finished balding yet and the wreath is not down to its "final" state. Almost 100% of scalp reduction procedures result in "Stretch back" and is a procedure that produces huge scars and is one to avoid. Read about it here, http://www.americanhairloss.org/surgica ... _avoid.asp from the American Hairloss Association.
Down the page (scroll) are pictures of a typical bad scalp reduction with the infamous "Y" result, http://www.bernsteinmedical.com/hair-tr ... -scars.php

Look at the things the American Hairloss Association says are terrible about the scalp reduction or "flap" surgery,

1 Flap/Hair Flap

A flap of hair bearing skin is moved from the side of the scalp to the front hairline by cutting it on three sides, thus not separating it from it’s blood supply or severing it completely from the scalp. The procedure is major surgery and is performed in a hospital. A flap is one inch wide and approximately three to seven inches long. It has to be twisted in order for the hair bearing side of the flap to end up facing outward from the head once it shifted over and stitched into the surgically removed balding area. A unsightly “knot†will always form where the flap has to be twisted. Other serious problem include:

• Necrosis: A very real chance of partial or complete death of the flap, leaving a horrific scar.

• Hair always grows in the opposite direction of a normal hairline.

• Infection

• Permanent shock loss and extreme scaring in the donor area

• Loosened skin in the forehead develops and hangs over the brow, giving a Frankenstein or Neanderthal appearance.

• Absence of hair behind the newly created frontal airline.

• Poor positioning of the flap (extremely common)

• The front hairline scar always has to be re-grafted to hide a linear scar.

• Integrity of the scalp is always compromised.

A type of flap known as the free-form flap is created when all fours side are cut and the flap is completely removed from the donor area so that it’s new position in the balding area can be set in a direction of natural growth. This is not a procedure recommended for men/women with common androgenic alopecia and should be reserved for severely disfigured patients such as burn or accident victims.

If your hair restoration surgeon offers his procedure for common hair loss, leave immediately.




Armando wrote: "OTOH, sebaceous gland is vital for hair, A evidence: transplatation of only hair is a mistake, Only works follicular unity trasplantation including sebaceous gland"


Congradulations Armando, you just disproved your own ridiculous Baldness theory. Sebaceous glands ARE INDEED moved with follicular units with moder hair transplantaion, and the hairs grow for all your life........................the "sebum" doesn't get "blocked, inhibited, backed up" or any of the other cockamamie things you claim. The hair doesn't fall out like the hair it was moved to replace, despite being on top of the head where the old hair miniaturized.


The "supposed" genetic differences are expressed in the fact that hair doesnt fall out in the wreath (but it does thin somewhat), and when wreath hair is moved to another place, it still grows. When male pattern baldness hair is moved (as the RU59941 study shows), it does not regrow for a second phase but 2% of the time on its own.

 

[Armando Jose]

MIchael Barry;
Have you some theory about common baldness or are you a follower of the androgenetic current theory?

Por otra parte, sabes español? lo digo porque parece que no me explico bien en ingles o que mis ideas se confunden o se quieren malinterpretar. Si es asi me lo dices porque Telogen Effluvium lo puedo explicar mucho mejor en el idioma de Cervantes.

Armando