It's been years, verdict on DT?

I haven't been around as often as I once was. I ended up unfortunately resorting to fin, and I spent a year doing that + DT and got tremendous hair gains. While my hair was far from perfect, and my hairline still a V, it appeared like a full head of hair. After 12-15 months of DT, I quit doing it because I wanted to see if I'd lose hair if I stopped, because I knew that if I got a hair transplant, I'd have to stop doing the therapy.

Well, I'd gained enough hair that the HT doc who was going to perform surgery on me, refused to give me the transplant stating that the hair loss in the photos I sent him months back, was nowhere near as extensive any longer, and to come back in the future.

I never did go back to doing DT even though I attributed a lot of my success to it. A lot of people told me that my hair gains were all just from the fin to the point where when it came down to deciding whether or not to continue the treatment, I took the easy way out and decided to believe that fin was all I needed. I've been off DT for over a year now, and my lifestyle hasn't been as good as it once was, with a messed up sleep schedule, inconsistent diet, all because I started to lose faith in naturals even mattering.

I had some issues getting a hold of fin and was off it for about 4-5 days. I panicked, and when I began inspecting my hair, I noticed I'd actually lost ground. Either because I have aggressive hair loss, and even being off for a few days is enough to lose some hair, or I just hadn't noticed that I'd begun to lose ground. Fact is, my hair isn't as full as it was a year ago.

A lot of you by now have a lot of experience with DT. Some of you have used it as your sole treatment and we have a lot of people who claim it works but a lot of them end up vanishing and we don't know how the story ended with them. Whether they did continue to make gains, or if they lost ground and decided to just give up the fight. What's clear is I need to end this reckless and lazy lifestyle and try to regain some ground and I'm scared it's not possible. I was content with the hair I had a year ago. It wasn't perfect, but it was good enough. But what I found in the mirror this past week is not ok and I'm afraid things will only get worse. I want to hear from you all whether or not DT works, and please do not be afraid to share your negative experiences if you have them. The DT experiment this forum started years back is mature enough to where I think a thread like this can be created, and we can pool our collective experiences to hopefully be able to move forward with more certainty whether or not we're wasting our time with the treatment or not.

This post is getting long so forgive me. My method of DT back when I began fin was using bian stones, and pinching the entirety of the scalp. I wet the scalp with warm water and let it dry a little, to allow the stones to grip the skin without damaging it, and I massaged for 30-40 min, 2x a day as I watched tv shows. It was much longer than the 20min 2x a day, but I was noticing that since I had found a way to avoid irritating the scalp too much(not using my nails, skin not being dry etc) I had no problems doing long sessions. If I were to restart DT, I'd probably go back to this.

Hi, I feel a bit guilty for declining to really try to prove how much regrow I have seen in reality. It is much more than the small focus are I have isolated. But with photos it all just looks like hairs and borderlines that shift with light and other variables such as lack of a grid on my head for exact progress measurements. I will post new photos soon. The focus area is isolated in the middle of the temple and shows consistent slow regrow, the border areas regrow much faster and thicker.

So minimally if DT can simply stop loss as it has for me, that is notable for sure. Perhaps for younger guys with violent shed it might not stop the shed completely.

For me there is a clear thickening of hairs slowly resulting in regrown full thickness terminal hairs at the rate of a few per month. The process from slick bald to what I just describes took over a year.

It sounds like you have the discipline. I just need guys to understand that if you do not see teen hair in 6-8 months, you can still be on the track to slow regrow. Finally at the stage that I am at now, so many base hairs have thickened progressively together, that it is not a big delayed step for them to go terminal at a faster rate.

Thank you for the response CD, and for your work in recording your progress in DT.

Lately it seems we are a much smaller number than before. I've been noticing that a lot of the regulars I used to see post all the time when I came here initially, panicked with my hair loss, have long moved on. I'd like to think they found something that worked for them, but some may have just found peace with their balding.

Anyway, in regards to DT, the only verdict I'll have it would appear, is the one I give myself. I'm going to have to restart the experiment, and do this for another year to finally close the book on this DT method for me personally. Your experiences are encouraging, but this is intermingled with less-than encouraging reports such as people coming in to plug DT books by using lighting tricks to feign density increases.

A lot of your photos are pretty close up, do you notice a cosmetic difference if you were to just look at yourself in the mirror? At this stage all I need is a tiny bit more frontal thickness to keep my full-hair illusion alive to those not actively looking for my hair loss when they look at me.

We are losing our hair because of bad genetics,luck, and circumstances-reasons we had no control over. Life was specifically designed so we would be the way we are right now. Some people are happy and others aren't. We were born to fail. I used to think humans truly had the power to change our lives, but I now know that's not true.  Our actions do have an effect, but the effects are on average so microscopic that they are insignificant.I've spent my entire life trying to disprove this and I failed. I've tried to escape this predetermined misery and I've always failed. This sounds and is depressing, but at the same time it's uplifting to know that it's not your fault the way your life was, is, and will be.

Some people are born with good genetics/fortune and others are born with terrible genetics/fortune.

Not everything has resulted in a failure for me. For example, I was able to stop having terrible gas by avoiding eggs, garlic, onions, and other junk.
What I'm trying to say is that not everything will result in a success. You win some and and you lose some. You can't win them all. In fact, you'll probably lose most of the time if you're like me. DT will give you results if you're fortunate-if you were born with the right genetics and in the right circumstances.

hi John, sorry to hear that things are not looking positive for you these days. You are commenting on DT like you are a experienced practicer. How many months of dedicated intensive DT have you done ? You are a fairly unique person being a strict vegan, so your results may not be typical of the general population.

I comment and ask because new people check in looking for hope, and they need some context to the reports of consistent posters. Also we need to sort out general philosophy from measurable results.

cdto2012 wrote:hi  John,   sorry to hear that things are not looking positive for you these days.  You are commenting on DT like you are a experienced practicer.  How many months of dedicated intensive DT have you done ?  You are a fairly unique person being a strict vegan,  so your results may not be typical of the general population.

I comment and ask because new people check in looking for hope, and they need some context to the reports of consistent posters. Also we need to sort out general philosophy from measurable results.

I only do DT once or twice a week for about 5 minutes.
I'm not 100% vegan, since I've been eating animal products,mostly in the form of junk like pizza,subway, and dairy ice cream. I only eat foods with animal products about twice a month mostly to temporarily distract myself from my stress and depression. I'd rather not eat it and I will completely stop eating animal products. Because of this, I'm a flexitarian. Please note that I'm not addicted to animal products. It's very easy to quit eating them and I recommend you to do the same.

My diet is not perfect.
I'd usually only eat a vegan diet of heart-healthy whole grains,legumes, and fruits in a day. Sometimes veggies too.
Michael Greger recommends 9 servings of fruits and vegetables a day. I've probably only eaten 2 servings a day.

A bit morbid on here today

We are losing our hair because of bad genetics,luck, and circumstances-reasons we had no control over. Life was specifically designed so we would be the way we are right now. Some people are happy and others aren't. We were born to fail. I used to think humans truly had the power to change our lives, but I now know that's not true. Our actions do have an effect, but the effects are on average so microscopic that they are insignificant.I've spent my entire life trying to disprove this and I failed. I've tried to escape this predetermined misery and I've always failed. This sounds and is depressing, but at the same time it's uplifting to know that it's not your fault the way your life was, is, and will be. Some people are born with good genetics/fortune and others are born with terrible genetics/fortune. Not everything has resulted in a failure for me. For example, I was able to stop having terrible gas by avoiding eggs, garlic, onions, and other junk. What I'm trying to say is that not everything will result in a success. You win some and and you lose some. You can't win them all. In fact, you'll probably lose most of the time if you're like me. DT will give you results if you're fortunate-if you were born with the right genetics and in the right circumstances. _________________ wrote:

To me you just seem whiny and arrogant. You expected certain components to work for you and they didn't. So now its "genetics determine everything, bad luck" as opposed to finding something else that might help. You're intellectually lazy, Humans do not have anywhere close to the full body of knowledge related to the mind/body nor the earth or the universe

john3333 wrote:We are losing our hair because of bad genetics,luck, and circumstances-reasons we had no control over. Life was specifically designed so we would be the way we are right now. Some people are happy and others aren't. We were born to fail. I used to think humans truly had the power to change our lives, but I now know that's not true.  Our actions do have an effect, but the effects are on average so microscopic that they are insignificant.I've spent my entire life trying to disprove this and I failed. I've tried to escape this predetermined misery and I've always failed. This sounds and is depressing, but at the same time it's uplifting to know that it's not your fault the way your life was, is, and will be.

Some people are born with good genetics/fortune and others are born with terrible genetics/fortune.

Not everything has resulted in a failure for me. For example, I was able to stop having terrible gas by avoiding eggs, garlic, onions, and other junk.
What I'm trying to say is that not everything will result in a success. You win some and and you lose some. You can't win them all. In fact, you'll probably lose most of the time if you're like me. DT will give you results if you're fortunate-if you were born with the right genetics and in the right circumstances.

I think you have a cop out type bad attitude. Quit comparing yourself to others. Sure genetics factor into hair loss. This is true with other things like strength, athletics and intellect. But you can still improve yourself. Eventually, I think, hair cloning or whatever will come along and then you can worry about something else..

It's possible that scalp massage may stimulate hair-growth but DT is probably bullshit. I contacted the researcher behind this technique, Henry Choy, and he refused to stand behind the study.

I tried this technique for around 6 months and lost hair and I've yet to be convinced by any testimonials to the contrary. This technique is a triumph of hope over knowledge and I pity those who try it.

Further to John's words, I do believe healthy diet and lifestyle make a big difference. I think a plant based diet, with low or no meat, can slow or halt the progression of hair loss for some people.

Fortunately a few treatments inc. Histogen and co. are on the horizon.

Hotspur wrote:It's possible that scalp massage may stimulate hair-growth but DT is probably bullshit. I contacted the researcher behind this technique, Henry Choy, and he refused to stand behind the study.

I also am not a big supporter of the very early Choy study for massaging non balding men for a fairly short period, although he claimed increased density. I think your original story was that Henry Choy would not talk live with you for cash, that is different than he would not publicly publish or stand behind his clinical trials.

As with the video below, some of the newer scientists are very busy with other projects. They are not doing extensive hair regrow studies, they are focused on genetic expression factors primarily.

minute 34 talks about mechanical stimulation and hair growth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnmT3qGb-FI

As for your personal story, DT is not a cure for all causes of mpb. Until your scalp has increased circulation and health, pinching and kneading an inflamed scalp may not be of much benefit or lead to loss. For me, after a year of the pressing method, my scalp is much healthier, and the slow regrow is progress.

Hey cd

Remember JD Moyer's post about DT too, he even has some pretty good before and after pictures

cdto2012 wrote:I think your original story was that Henry Choy would not talk live with you for cash, that is different than he would not publicly publish or stand behind his clinical trials.

I'm familiar with Ogawa's work. I posted his study on this forum.

Don't misunderstand my original note on Choy. I stated that this behaviour wasn't consistent with a man who found a cure for hair-loss. Why don't you outline ways in which he has stood behind his study?

I have deep misgivings about Rob and JD too. It may be that they're genuine and that DT works for a narrow subset of hair-loss sufferers. Thus far however, it hasn't worked for the vast majority.

... And that should be a big fat disclaimer for anyone wishing to go ahead.

DT is like any other working treatment work fast for you only if you are early mpb and you can see that from JD pictures ...if your hair is receded to the half of your head or more then it will probably take more than year to recover but of course the first result will be seen in a month .
also i believe there is strong factor that will held many people from getting good result from their treatment ..stress .. it is all about positive VS negative ,you doing DT(positive) while you are stressed(negative) about your hair loss is like pushing a mountain to move it it is impossible ,you just need to forget about hair loss then any working treatment in this forum may work for you.

Like I said,  I am also not a big fan of the Choy study for a few reasons. It was fine for a start to massage, but needed bigger numbers and had some weak measurements.  For example, to determine baldness,  if you had less than X diameter of bundled hair from a given area, you were bald- not very quantitative. You might have normal thin fine hair, you might have AA, instead of MPB.  Also claiming a 90% full regrow rate in 300 days is a very big claim.  

From the study
 https://www.omicsonline.org/detumescence-therapy-of-human-scalp-for-natural-hair-regrowth-2155-9554.1000138.pdf
"observation, over 90% hair recovery was also found to be regrown from
the hair follicles for each bald person in this study. "

I suppose that Choy was a university of Hong Kong researcher, and it is normal enough for people to publish studies,  have them peer reviewed, and not have the focus to get more grant funding or switch to doing professional pharma funded research. Perhaps there was some kinds of pressure directed toward him to not hugely publicize a free, natural,  and drug free treatment. This happens at universities that get a lot of research funding from pharmaceutical grants.  My only point is that he was not publicly challenged about his study and later admitted to his studies being a fraud.    

As for DT in general, basic massage might work for some. DT-CPR is much more intense and painful with it's pressing. The difference is that  with DT-CPR there is no recommended pinching or kneading with the hands.  The treatment is not really in full benefit operation until the pain goes away months into the treatment meaning that the scalp is finally healthier.  

I suppose that I have about 10 guys that have stuck with the program,  and most of them report healthier scalp conditions with slow regrow.  For the few with pre-existing fast shed,  not sure if it will stop this. The very few that have unusual conditions, I just tell them to stop until their nutrition or other irritants returns their scalp to normal responses to pressing.

So for me I still maintain that DT-CPR is foundational for a healthy scalp. If you get slow regrow you are fortunate. The methods of pinching, rubbing, or kneading an unhealthy inflamed scalp of traditional DT , which I have my reservations about. This is why I have stuck with and documented a more painful and disciplined DT-CPR method that is   absolutely regrowing long lost hair.

cdto2012 wrote:

I suppose that Choy was a university of Hong Kong researcher, and it is normal enough for people to publish studies,  have them peer reviewed, and not have the focus to get more grant funding or switch to doing professional pharma funded research. Perhaps there was some kinds of pressure directed toward him to not hugely publicize a free, natural,  and drug free treatment. This happens at universities that get a lot of research funding from pharmaceutical grants.  My only point is that he was not publicly challenged about his study and later admitted to his studies being a fraud.  

'Peer reviewed'. When and by who?

'Normal enough'. To invest 8 years of your life into a study that cures hair loss and not publicize it?

'Perhaps some of kind of pressure ...' Reaching.

... And as for your pictures? If your regrowth is not cosmetically significant enough to showcase on camera then it's not significant at all.

If I'm being harsh to you, it's because unfounded statements about unproven interventions do more harm than good in this community. Let's not waste anyones time.

The study was released to be published by a peer reviewed journal .
https://www.omicsonline.org
https://www.omicsonline.org/detumescence-therapy-of-human-scalp-for-natural-hair-regrowth-2155-9554.1000138.pdf

The study was publicly released and published,  that is why even you have heard of it.

"... And as for your pictures? If your regrowth is not cosmetically significant enough to showcase on camera then it's not significant at all. "

Are you the only person that can't see that I have posted near a hundred of photos on this very forum,  it is probably 7 posts away today.  

https://immortalhair.forumotion.com/t11945-selected-dt-cpr-photographs

If you do not personally like DT that is fine,  but judging research by what you expect for follow up is not a very scientific method.  The guy might have gotten cancer or even died, who knows, and not made it public. Stop acting like you know everything about everybody.  I gave my opinion on the research based on the research content,  just keep your opinion as an opinion, speculation on what should be expected is not a very scientific method of content evaluation.

dude, for the love of god, please just stop all the Bs and deflection, and admit IT DOESNT WORK. its the right thing to do. theres no shame in it, most of us have failed at fixing it. scientists with billions of dollars backing and much knowledge and experience have failed. lots here have failed and gone back on to minox and fin.

lets just all tell the truth to ourselves and everyone else. then maybe we can get on with the remainder of our lives while we wait for a real solution to come along.

cdto2012 wrote:

If you do not personally like DT that is fine,  but judging research by what you expect for follow up is not a very scientific method.  The guy might have gotten cancer and not made it public. Stop acting like you know everything about everybody.  I gave my opinion on the research based on the research content,  just keep your opinion as an opinion, speculation on what should be expected is not a very scientific method of content evaluation.

You're saying Choy's study was reviewed by peers? Please post those reviews.

It's difficult to review your images. Why don't put your best before/after on one image for us to judge.

And '... The guy might have gotten cancer ...' Lol.

It is easy enough to view the first post and the most recent post for comparison,  there is a reason it is one of the most followed posts on the forum. My method is not for people that are too lazy to even view one page of photos. Personally I dont care what you and ROFL think. The photos are for others to consider and do what they want, not to waste my time spoon feeding lazy people speculating that their opinions are super valuable.

Peer review does not mean that the reviews are published publicly. Having research published in a journal that is peer reviewed means that it was approved and met the standards.

cdto2012 wrote:

Peer review does not mean that the reviews are published publicly.  Having research published in a journal that is peer reviewed means that it was approved and met the standards.  

Don't take it personally CD. I wish you the best with your approach. If a couple of people benefit then more power to you ... But be realistic and honest with yourself and others.

The OMICS Publishing Group is a case in point. As I understand it, OMICS is a pay to publish platform and isn't taken seriously by most researchers.

rofl wrote:dude, for the love of god, please just stop all the Bs and deflection, and admit IT DOESNT WORK.  its the right thing to do.  theres no shame in it, most of us have failed at fixing it.  scientists with billions of dollars backing and much knowledge and experience have failed.  lots here have failed and gone back on to minox and fin.

lets just all tell the truth to ourselves and everyone else.  then maybe we can get on with the remainder of our lives while we wait for a real solution to come along.  

What doesn't work for you doesn't mean it won't work for anyone else. All I see is a bunch of ego talking from both sides, man up and experiment on yourself or stop worrying about your hair loss and shave it. Rogaine and Minox don't work for everyone either

Here's some quotes to put this thread in to perspective

Nutrition research is relevant to your own body. If you don't experiment with your body, you're setting yourself up to being scammed.

Without self-experimentation, reading research is an exercise in confirmation bias. Researchers will always conclude what you want to hear.

It's the exact opposite of science to spend time reading benefits & risks of foods but never experiment with removing them from your diet

Reading plenty of research papers & never experimenting on yourself is the most anti-scientific method you can follow in life.

Hotspur wrote:

cdto2012 wrote:

Peer review does not mean that the reviews are published publicly.  Having research published in a journal that is peer reviewed means that it was approved and met the standards.  

Don't take it personally CD. I wish you the best with your approach. If a couple of people benefit then more power to you ... But be realistic and honest with yourself and others.

The OMICS Publishing Group is a case in point. As I understand it, OMICS is a pay to publish platform and isn't taken seriously by most researchers.

Thank you for some human hopefulness and encouragement.  

Due to it's relevance, if OMICS is a pay to publish outfit, that is evidence that somebody was pushing to publicize the research and Choy did not object or retract the published content, even after money was paid to give widespread exposure.

cdto2012 wrote:

Thank you for some human hopefulness and encouragement.  

Due to it's relevance, if OMICS is a pay to publish outfit, that is evidence that somebody was pushing to publicize the research and Choy did not object or retract the published content, even after money was paid to give widespread exposure.

It means OMICS sent out a bulk email, Choy responded and paid up to $2000 to have his work published.