The magical hair

I know,I know… I’m the guy who should read what has been said but there’s WAY to much of it…  I just want to know what you guys think about my thinking (A lot of it is base on Ray Peat (D. Roddy too, obviously)… I think both are pretty much right on everything).

The DHT thing is stupid. I think DHT should be approach as a protective hormone in face of too much estrogen. If all the others mechanism failed in face of too much estrogen, then DHT goes up since it doesn’t aromatase in estrogen. I’ve seen a lot of you talking about bones health and such…IN MY OPINION, there’s a strong connection and it deserve a lot more attention… Ray Peat talk many times about the harmful effects of estrogen on bone health and the effect of DHT on bone mass is known. Estrogen/PTH affecting the health of bones, removing the calcium and probably a lot of other essential elements… leading to calcium overload and probably leading to calcification…reduce blood flow, etc & etc, we know the story…

I know some of you talked about it but I also think A LOT more attention should be given to the interconnection between the guts and bone health… therefore the magical hair… Since I'm new, I can't post the link but there’s a bunch of studies that all go in the same direction. Some probiotics (L.casei (DUHHHHH) increase the absorption of calcium to the bones.

In his article, Calcum and Disease, Peat talked about the inflammatory IL-6 that increase with aging, I’ve seen many studies saying that probiotic also reduce IL-6… and other inflammatory markers associated with bones…

- A deficiency of either calcium or magnesium canstimulate the parathyroid glands to produce more hormone (parathyroid hormone, PTH), which increases calcium absorption, but also removes calcium from the bones. This hormone, responding to a dietary calcium or magnesium deficiency, is an important factor in causing cells to take up too much calcium, and its excess is associated with many inflammatory and degenerative diseases. Interleukin-6 (IL-6), an inflammatory cytokine which increases with aging, is commonly considered to have an important role in the multiple processes of atrophy in old age. One of the things which can increase the production of IL-6 is the parathyroid hormone (PTH), which increases the amount of calcium circulating in the blood, partly by causing it to be removed from the bones; IL-6 stimulates the process of calcium removal from bones.

Prolactin, which is increased under the influence of estrogen or serotonin, causes the body to lose calcium (drawing it from the bones), and it stimulates the secretion of PTH, which compensates for the calcium loss by increasing its mobilization from bones. Prolactins action on bone is at least partly by increasing IL-6 formation; IL- 6 stimulates the release of prolactin. Serotonin and IL-6 stimulate each others secretion, and PTH and serotonin each stimulate the others release..


I have a lot more to say about it (maybe nobody want to read about it) but I leave it there for now… But I think it should be strongly considered…


For the curious, my hairloss started at 19. The vertex first and the hairline after that. It got worst for like a year (itching and all) and stopped after that. I’m 25 and still have a very good amount of hair. Hairline is probably NW1 (whatever it mean) with A LOT OF REGROWTH, both hairline and temples, not vellus hair, like 1-2 inches blonde hair and it started about 3 months ago. Vertex is even more stupid… I have hairs that keep growing, they are just blonde so it look like thinning (I’m dark brown).

Anyway, that’s wayyyyyy to long but whatever...

So do you have a particular regimen that you're attributing to your claimed regrowth or is your regrowth just occurring independently of the theory you're presenting?

That sounded a bit snarky reading it back, but yea just curious.

I'm not poised to get in a long drawn-out argument to refute everything wrong with a Peat-centric view on hair loss.

What I would encourage you to do though is not approach his work dogmatically as it regards hair loss. There are many other angles
that he does not consider but weigh heavily on the issue, and unfortunately the androgens aren't able to just be skirted like this. They are
causative in this equation, even if not solely.

Peat's views on sex hormones can be very myopic, and he does have a tendency such that once he forms a conclusion about a hormone's effect, that it must be uniform throughout the body. This is not the case. And he often cherry picks things to support his conclusions, at least about certain things.

Estrogen is one of those things. Estrogen is vital for bone density, not the opposite.

Also one glaring hole in the "estrogen is the enemy of hair" perspective, why is it that in women estrogens aren't having this effect and creating a female pattern baldness. If DHT is protective and estrogens are damaging, then we'd expect women to lose hair more than men correct?

Why would it be that during pregnancy, when women's estrogen levels spike, that its commonly noted that their hair gets thicker and more lush during this phase? Or the fact that estradiol has been shown to regrow hair? Or that aromatase levels are lowered in balding regions of the male scalp?

Prolactin can and does promote hair loss, however, to implicate it in a condition as ubiquitous as male pattern hair loss is like saying that since matches can light a fire, that wild fires are all caused by matches. Its been discussed here before and many of the guys who chimed in reported middle-of-the-road levels of prolactin. Same with me.