|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 02:23 pm: ||
Now we all know that when a boy becomes a man at puberty, certain hormones play a roll too make the voice darker and for that boy to grow some or a little of hair on the body…
And that’s when MPB can start! If you have inherited the certain sensitivity of the by-product DHT
Now what made me think about this…
There are people who have little or no body hair at all but still loose their hair and there are people who have a good amount of body hair and also loose their hair!
They say a balding person has more testosterone then a non-balding one?
But a balding person can have as much testosterone as a non-balding one
At the same time…
If that is true, then more DHT would be created from the testosterone making the hair loss worse!
The say DHT is what makes the body hair grow!
If that is true, and the non-balding person is hairless in the body and the balding person has hair on his body then it must be something triggering DHT right?
The question is what might that function be?
Anyone who knows? jpj?
|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 02:58 pm: ||
High levels of the alpha 5 reductase enzymes (both type 1 and type 2) are proboably present in the skin of men with hairy bodies.
However, other hormones can stimulate body hair growth too.....plain ol'testosterone, etc.
Gabe, its our individual hair's sensitivity to DHT, and other male hormones, and possibly even insulin-like growth factor that makes em' shirk up and miniaturize. The DNA on hair in the balding areas is different than the DNA on hairs in the hippocratic wreath. Some of us have hair that it insensitive to this DHT, but some of us have hair thats in varrying levels "weakened" by it. Thats why our hair falls out.
Take a guess
|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 04:34 pm: ||
"Gabe, its our individual hair's sensitivity to DHT, and other male hormones, and possibly even insulin-like growth factor"
jpj, if you think insulin like growth factor causes hair loss you've got it the wrong way around. There is a single study which suggests this might be the case, but it's the consensus nowadays that igf-1 is vital for hair growth. Of course, since you don't read medical journals and derive all your knowledge from google and message boards [and have a hard time understanding anything remotely scientific even if you do happen to chance across it] you wouldn't know.
No offense to you jpj, but your incompetence may end up misleading others.
|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 07:15 pm: ||
Dear Take a guess,
Please.....state what you think happens in hairloss......I'd love to know (by the way, the info on Insulin-like growth factor came from a scientific article).
|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 08:23 pm: ||
Take a guess:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1 0025745&dopt=Abstract Take a gander at that. Make sure you read this too http://www.drmirkin.com/men/8842.html
Little more? http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/full/9/3/325
And read this too http://www.endotext.org/male/male18/male18.htm
You know Take a guess.....Coca Cola may have more to do with baldness in Japan than Soy does......our modern diet has UNPRECEDENTED levels of sugars and fats in the history of man. Apparently, genetically predisposed hair follicles can use these induced high glycemics to initiate pattern baldness like a "weaker" DHT. Youd do well to listen to Tom about eating your veggies, watching high fats and high sugars.
Again though "take a guess", please make a long post and describe what you think about baldness and why it happens. I swear I wont make fun of it. I like to learn, and you may know somethin'. Im pretty certain that high insulin in the blood and tissues is bad for head hair though.
|Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 10:26 pm: ||
"No offense to you jpj, but your incompetence may end up misleading others."
LOL, I'm also tired of all of the "search engine scientists" showing everybody "the way" on sites. Nothing makes you special just because you read a couple of studies. You are not special just because you regurgitate crusty vanilla flavored theories on hair loss. I'm not trying to act any smarter or better than you, but then again I'm not trying to be anybodies source of info.
Nothing you have ever read is written in stone.
|Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2006 - 12:38 am: ||
Like I said earlier......PLEASE post your insight on why men go bald, Im dying to hear it.
http://www.endotext.org/male/male18/male18.htm That link pretty much explains it all by the way......
Like Ive said before......online cynics and obfuscators are proboably transplant salesmen. If men know the truth about baldness and how its genetically RELENTLESS, they will be very unlikely to get surgery because they know if they wind up like Dr. Phil (and most of em' will at age 65 or so), they know they wont have enough to move. Also, if they knew the truth about receptor blockers, topical DHT inhiborts, propecia, nizoral, superoxide dismutases, they'd know that they CAN hold off baldness for a couple of decades.....enough time for gene therapy or cloning to take place.
I know YOU know that, and its costing you "clients" isnt it?
|Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2006 - 09:54 pm: ||
jpj: don't take all the hope out of hair transplants. If a guy waits till his hairloss stabilizes, and is no worse than a Norwood 5a in his 30s and 40s, then he has a decent chance of gaining good frontal and midline coverage through a good transplant surgeon.
A good surgeon will design a transplant with the thought in mind that the hairline will further recede on the sides and back. That means that there would be certain boundries that the surgeon should stay within, so as to avoid an unnatural appearance if further recession occurs later on.
It is no unusual to see men who have maintained the frontal hairline and have lost everything behind it. A good transplant surgeon can duplicate this look without causing the transplant to take on a unnatural appearance if further recession takes place down the road.
It is up to the individual to decide if it's worth it.
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 01:07 am: ||
Thats right my friend, its your choice. Look at this pic of Frank Sinatra in his late teens man http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.essentialart.com/mh/Frank_Sina tra_1938.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Frank_Sinatra_1938.h tm&h=600&w=343&sz=48&tbnid=_LwXeZHKjPX1-M:&tbnh=133&tbnw=76&hl=en&start=150&prev =/images%3Fq%3Dfrank%2Bsinatra%26start%3D140%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa %3DN I had hair like that at one time.
Now look at Sinatra with Elvis in Sinatra's late 40's http://www.emediawire.com/prfiles/2005/01/17/198530/FRANK_SINATRA_PRESLEY.JPG
Sinatra eventually wore a hairpiece in his fifties because he was pretty much bald. If you look at the first pic again, you will see that Sinatra once had hair VERY comprable to Elvis'es (so did I), but he had the right mix of the baldness genes.
Thats what I wish to impress on men. Look at the young Vladimir Lenin http://www.stel.ru/museum/lenin_museum_images/lenin_young.jpg. Now look how bald he eventually went http://www.rednews.org/clipart/lenin/lenin_and_stalin.jpg . Think there is enough donor hair there for a transplant? What if a man with similar genetics got plugs when he first started to receed. Its definitely a risk.
This is why its wise to just buzz the head, fight it with what we have, and wait on cloning or a gene cure in my opinion. Guys can do what they want, but I do like to warn them. I hate to see the sad stories one sees on hairsite.com. Lots of disfigured guys coming up with 50 thousand or more to have body hair moved to their head to fix old, horrible transplants. The body hair doesnt usually look right at all, and they have "funny looking" short hair on their heads in most cases. Spend their life savings on it too. Thank God for Michael Jordan, Vin Diesel, Michael Rosenbaum (lex luthor), Daman Wayans, etc.....you can still be a cool, handsome man if your bald and wear it neat. Im hoping for great success in cloning so balding will be a choice, but Im not putting my eggs in cloning's basket until its been performed and has many happy patients, etc. Best of luck on your decision Paul
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 01:27 pm: ||
Michael Rosenbaum do have hair if he grows it out it's not like he is completly bald or something
I don't understand why he takes the choice to shave it? it looks perfectly normal i can't even grow my hair out like that!
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 01:31 pm: ||
That was maybe before he started loosin or somethin you never know hair loss is tricky it can make you bald in less then a year!
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 02:25 pm: ||
Its kinda funny about Rosenbaum (I knew he had hair), that he looks a little better bald to me. He has that "super cool bald head thingy" goin' on in his role as Lex Luthor. Smooth villan, smooth head.
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 11:01 pm: ||
jpj & Gabe: When you can't be sure if your headed to a Norwood 6 or 7, that is scary, I'll give you that. Look what happened to Ron Howard! He's as bald as you can get and I believe he's only 47 or so. Check the link.
These are extreme cases though. Even of you turn into a Norwood 7, you can get a limited frontal transplant that will at least reframe your face. If I was a 7, I wouldn't bother, but it can be done.
Senator Joe Bidden is a good example. He is a Norwood 7, yet he has a decent frontal transplant. From behind he's still very bald, but from the frontal vantage point he looks pretty good. This is the best pic i could find.
No doubt that most guys are better off shaving their hair very short and moving on to other feats in life because beating baldness isn't going to be one of them. Cloning is probably 25 years away or more, and any treatments of lessor significance are probably another 15 years away judging from the way things are going. When was the last time medicine cured anything? Really? They can manage some conditions, but rarely ever cure them.
For the few of us who would like to hold onto even a marginally decent hairline, then transplants are the last option that are known to work. With the advent of Propecia, some of us have a better chance at warding off MPB for a few years or so, thereby giving transplants longer lasting results, and making a transplant a more attractive option in the hands of a good surgeon.
Many of these bad surgeries you have seen have been done by poorly skilled and untrained doctors, if you can call them doctors. Many of them are docs who couldn't make it in real medicine. One transplant doc that I had consulted with was a former hand surgeon in Philly. Why would he leave that profession if he was any good at it? It rasied a red flag in my mind. I Xed him off my list.
In defense of hair transplants, I have personally seen some very impressive results in at least 4 different people.
Gabe: As far as Michael Rosenbaum...I have a sneaky suspicion that he is balding and has opted to shave it clean before it get anyones attention. He looks far better with hair.
I think Howie Mandel is another example of a bald man who has chosen the shaved look, but I don't think this look suits him either.
|Posted on Sunday, March 05, 2006 - 11:58 pm: ||
Paul z, cloning is expected in five years. That is what Intercylex and Anderans are saying. They have been speaking with the FDA about simultaneous testing while they are working on their product. I personally think it will be 6 or 7 years before you go to a clinic, get shots of your own stem cells, and have hair sprouting in 4 months, but I think it will happen. None of the trialists or mice this has been used on have had ANY bad effects. One, scientist Paul Kemp, showed his NEW hair to a journalist. The journalist was impressed. The companies are not releasing pictures of the trialees so far because the treated areas are the size of a piece of change in your pocket, but density has been good. 5 of 7 grew hair in Intercyclex's latest trial.
Their products (Intercyclex) are already used in facial rejuvination and wound healing. Its the same stuff....stem cells injected into aged or burned areas getting the body to "make" new skin.
Hairsite and the posters John the Revelator (a lawyer)and especially James Bond (a mathematician) know more about cloning than any doc Ive seen post on the issue. DO NOT GET YOUR CLONING INFO FROM A HAIR DOC. This is armageddon for them Paul, they are being made obsolete. "Cloning" will put them out of business when it comes out, and they know it. So they tell people its eons away, causes cancer, looks bad, and all other sorts of bullSH@t.
If you want to look like Joe Biden, go for it. However, EVERYBODY knows Joe Biden has plugs. In person, I imagine he looks very "peculiar". Transplants can be a good thing for a guy who knows NW3-4 is his final state of baldness. However, I bet ol' Joe looks a little strange in outdoor light. Hair proboably blows in every which direction. Ive seen a few "good HT'S" in my time. They are always on men who just needed a little work. The density "further back" never can be achieved. Ive kept an open mind on transplantation, body hair transplantation, etc. But just have not seen the results that would induce me to consider it.
Id link you pics from hairsite about some bad transplant work on guys who have pitiful amounts of donor hair, but the docs over there have fixed their pics to where they cant be linked in the past day or so (because Ive been doing it all over the internet). One pic of a guy with thin weak plugs in front of a bald plain will insure a guy never transplants. Im sure some of the troll salesman posters have gotten with the docs and fixed this up. Funny huh?
|Posted on Monday, March 06, 2006 - 07:30 am: ||
You mentioned Joe Biden. I like the man but still when I see him on a Sunday-morning talk show there is alway that memory of how he lifted, almost word-for-word, the speach of a British politician. The following is from The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing:
Plagiarism can have catastrophic consequences for one's career as a student and even later on in life—and the higher one's ambition takes one, the higher the stakes. In 1987, for instance, Senator Joe Biden, who was seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, was accused of plagiarizing passages in speeches and interviews from the oratory of a British politician, Neil Kinnock. Here are some of the passages in question:
Why am I the first Kinnock in a thousand generations to be able to get to university? Why is Glenys the first woman in her family in a thousand generations to be able to get to university?
Was it because our predecessors were thick? Does anybody really think that they didn't get what we had because they didn't have the talent or the strength or the endurance or the commitment? Of course not. It was because there was no platform upon which they could stand.
I started thinking as I was coming over here, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? Why is it that my wife who is sitting out there in the audience is the first in her family to ever go to college?
Is it because our fathers and mothers were not bright? . . . No, it's not because they weren't as smart. It's not because they didn't work as hard. It's because they didn't have a platform upon which to stand . . .
It turned out Biden had also borrowed passages from old campaign speeches by Robert Kennedy and had inflated his academic record. But oratory has a long tradition of borrowing and even "heavy lifting," as speechwriters call it, so Biden stayed alive in the presidential race. The last straw, however, came when it turned out that twenty years earlier Biden had received a failing grade in a law school course for plagiarizing a legal article (he'd given a single footnote while lifting five full pages from the article). Biden said he'd been unaware of the appropriate standards for legal briefs, but the public was unimpressed. His campaign collapsed and he withdrew from the race.
When you lose your reputation it's hard to get it back. Stealing someone's words is as bad as stealing someone's money. Stealing someone's wife - that's OK though.
good old bush
|Posted on Monday, March 06, 2006 - 09:02 am: ||
Who does Bush steal his words from?
|Posted on Monday, March 06, 2006 - 09:10 pm: ||
"Good writers borrow, GREAT writers steal"- William Shakesphere,,,,,just kidding, the bard didn't say that-LOL
I keep hearin' that Biden is "centering" himself for another presidential run. He's moved towards the center the past few years hasn't he? (with the exception of grilling court nominees)
"Stealing someone's wife-that's OK though"----society sure as hell doens't look down on that anymore. I read a piece years ago (before the neo-cons took it over) in the Weekly Standard about some of the great romances of the twentieth century and how they inevitably were formed by adultry leaving a lonely, brokenhearted spouse. It was kind of sickening. Sort of like Brad Pitt obvioulsy ditching a woman who loved him for a gal who is just a little bit hotter, and nobody condeming him for it.
On Biden's hair work, its pretty good. Ive noticed on some Sunday talk show pics though that mid-anterior that he has nothing. He is thinking about what his face looks like on TV. Our friend Paul z is thinking the same thing I think. I hope he makes the best decision for himself. I hurt for men who lost alot of hair early. I know how that feels, like your youth is being taken away by the Almighty for something you "just must" have done, but cant figure out what. The thing I try to remember is how people talk about you when youre not around. A incomplete transplant with bare scalp over the top and back and whether or not they will see you as insecure or "funny looking" from behind or whatnot.
Id definitely want to go to an open house and see some NW5-6 level transplants first before commiting to a surgeon. Pics are just too misleading for this.
On another note, Bob Dole was a accused of borrowing in his speeches in the 1996 presidential campain.....to which he replied "I am not and will fight any accusation to the contrary, I'll fight it in the streets, on the beaches, in the air, in the hills......."-LOL
Chruchill would be a good politician to borrow from speachwise. Reagan didnt say too many really dynamic things, but he said things so well and with so much ethos and tone, that even people who hated the guy were moved. He was the best I ever saw. The Great Communicator
|Posted on Monday, March 06, 2006 - 10:12 pm: ||
Good old bush, jpj and Tom:
You guys touched a nerve when you mention politics.
LOL about George W. Bush getting his Ideas from a monkey. I think a monkey might be smarter. If there is any one failure in recent presidents, it's him. He can't finish a thought without outside help. He's dragged us into an unecessary, terrible war that has gone nowhere because we don't know where our enemy really is.
He is spending the country into oblibion, and he is all about helping the Iraqis while the Katrina victims at home are being bascially ignored by his administration. They have recently said that their recovery depends on our donations. I take this to mean that these people can expect little help from the federal gov at this point, while they offer more tax breaks to the wealthy and spend more abroad in mind boggling dollar amounts.
Americans suffer for assistance in different areas from health care to education, lost pensions, and job security, while Bush extends millions to countries overseas to promote democracy in places like Iran among other untimely expenditures.
His programs from, "No child left behind" have failed along with the mess he has made of the medicare health system.
This is a man who has broken long standing nuclear peace treaties with Russia, and pulled us out of a world wide agreement to control global warming. He has altered the EPA regulations, making the use of burning coal with less filtering a bigger threat in respect to mercury poisioning that we already see in our oceans, fish, and drinking water.
He has destroyed just about everything he has touched. He has driven the country into a whopping debt that is being reflected in almost everything we buy. He is systemically ruining the economy by supporting the exporting of our jobs wholesale. How can this guy defend that, along with his hiring of Arabs to watch our ports at a time of war.
Tom, the contrast between Biden and Bush is a big one. Joe Biden may not be the best chose for president, but his intelligence level and basic skills far exceed anything Bush is capable of.
jpj: If hair cloning is that close, then I'll be a monkeys uncle,LOL.
|Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2006 - 07:57 pm: ||
Paul z.....Im thinking a good 7 years on cloning personally. Id give em' an extra 2 years to get it down. However, I bet in about 3 years we will KNOW alot more about what is going on there, and when we can expect a procedure.
On Bush......terrorists can enter this country through unsecured borders and soon to be unsecured ports while old ladies are stripped searched at airports.
Multinational corporations outsource our jobs to India and China and insource workers from everywhere to undercut wages and benefits here, but tell us its our patriotic duty to borrow money (from China really--look who is holding our T-bills) and buy things at Walmart made somewhere else.
Bush has grown the deficit, government borrowing, personal debt has skyrocketed, unsecured credit card debt has skyrocketed, and home prices are outlandishly high, preventing affordable family formation (hence our now below replacement native birthrate), and legions of childless career women.
Bush has been a lousy leader if youre anywhere near a "normal" American. If youre a member of the "investor class", already rich and just make your money off the stock market, the SOB has been pretty good to you. Great when you consider that your dividends an stock holdings are no longer taxed as income (if not that, what the PHUCK are they), but at a flat low 15% rate. The wealthiest among us are taxed as if they are poor, while the shrinking middle class struggles. Home ownership is available to more people than ever before, if they get a 30-40 year mortgage to buy a shoddily constructed vinyl sided house framed in 1 1/2" by 3 1/2" cheap lumber that was grown on factory farms with wide grains that will be susceptible to bowing and mold in 25 years. In other words in California, ANYWHERE, you'll pay $250,000 bucks for a 2 bedroom little starter home. Wonder why we cant be compeditive with wages? Think people might need to make more to start a life here than in the Huang province on the Yellow river in china where ya' get a concrete high rise apartment to nap in between your 14 hour shifts at the sweatshop.
I could go on. I was a John F. Kennedy Democrat/Reagan Republican. A Truman/Eisenhower type of guy. I get so mad when I think about how the elite cultrually, educationally, and especially financially are screwing the masses, I cant see straight. I really have grown to hate Bush. To think, I voted for the SOB in his first election too. What a con-artist and liar he is.
|Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 03:16 am: ||
I'm glad I have read this. I am English and I honestly thought all you Americans had gone completely insane for voting Bush into a second term.
Nice to see that there are some "Normal Americans" as you put it.
|Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 04:55 pm: ||
are the english not insane for voting in poodle blair for a third term,two peas in a pod those two
|Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 08:58 pm: ||
Amercians who didn't vote for Bush were those who can see how the far right has duped the people through circus clown commentators like Rush Limbaugh. I'm one who saw through the nonsense and didn't vote for Bush in either election. The Republicans have managed to use a brain washing technique for the last 8 years that has fooled many people into believing that they represent the average wage earner.
Bush won the 2nd election by cloking himself in religious garb and rhetoric, leading people to believe that he was somewhat of a saint that was going to protect them from the boggie man, Gay people and abortionists. Little did people know that these issues were going to be the least of their worries after he took office.
Bush mentions God in almost every statement, an attempt to appease the far religious right who are really his bosses who helped put him in office. Those people being powerful evangelists like Robertson and Falwell who have over the years gathered a huge following in the Republican and Democratic arena, not to mention huge dollar amounts that go a long way in either eliminating or elevating a potential candidate for president who suits their narrow minded needs.
As a consequence, we have incompetent reckless cowboys in office who have stirred up a big hornets nest in the Middle East, an already volatile region. What ever happened to diplomacy? Even though these Arabs are nuts cases, diplomacy is almost always a better approach in most situations.
We need a president with diplomacy skills like Captain Picard ( Patrick stewart) on Star Trek, "The next Generation."... He was an expert in diplomacy and managed to avoid many scrapes with the Kligons, Cardasions, Romulins, etc.
|Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 04:33 am: ||
pungent, you said:
"are the english not insane for voting in poodle blair for a third term,two peas in a pod those two"
British politics works very differently to the American system. We don't vote for a particular person (Tony Blair), we actually vote for our local MP's. The major parties are Labour and the Conservitives.
The party with the largest number of MP's will form the goverment.
Hope this has cleared things up for you.