Interesting Read on DHT

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/reform8.htm

Much of the article discusses DHT's role in prostate cancer/BPH, but I think it applies with equal force in the hairloss context. Briefly stated, the idea is that usually it is not DHT that causes prostate problems, but rather an acceptable amount of DHT in the presence of unacceptable amounts of estrogen. An analogy may be like epoxy that has no effect when the two chemicals are kept separate, but have incredible bonding capabilities when mixed. In that instance, removing either chemical will prevent the "bonding" effect. Or, in the case of men, the prostate problems and hairloss.

Thus, the question is which chemical--or hormone--to remove: the estrogen or DHT. Well, we know that DHT does a lot of good for men. It prevents estrogen dominance, gives erection strength, libido, strength, etc. It makes us men. Thus, removing DHT (a la finisteride) is not the way to go. Estrogen, on the other hand, is needed in far less concentrations. Many men experience an increase in well being, body composition, and sexual performance when they rein in estrogen. This would suggest that a man should treat prostate problems and hairloss by targeting excessive estrogen rather than "excessive" DHT.

This seems to jibe with my observations. Virtually every man who is bald is fat. Being fat does not come from having too much testosterone. Indeed, virtually no hormone burns fat quite like high testosterone. Estrogen, on the other hand, triggers fat storage.

The other possibility is that hairloss is caused by inflammation and high cortisol, which will also cause fat gain. In that instance, you will also see hypogonadism as cortisol suppresses testosterone, but estrogen may appear within range.

In sum, bald men should target high estrogen and/or cortisol. Doing so will result in better hair and improved body composition/performance.

Very interesting, thanks for the info. EIC!

EIC,

No disrespect...DHT/androgens have been proven for years over and over again to be the trigger for MPB. This estrogen debate goes back years on alt.baldspot. I am not saying that estrogen doesn't play a role, but to neglect DHT is a big mistake. The most effective treatment out there regardless of sides is finasteride or dutasteride. Also...there are a lot of skinny bald guys. If it was as simple as combating estrogen then arimidex, nolvadex, etc. would regrow hair. Bodybuilders who inject testosterone, wouldn't lose hair because they also take anti-estrogens, but they do. Women have tons of estrogen, and it is when their androgens go up that they can experience what is similar to MPB. You can see this with those huge bodybuilding women who take tons of androgens and have receeding hairlines just like a man. They actually witnessed hair growth as a side effect of finasteride during trials for BPH. So much so that they went on to market it for MPB. There is no anti-estrogen that I know of that has ever produced the same observable results. I would love to believe as much as the next guy that DHT is not the problem so I don't have to deal with all the side effects of reducing DHT systemically, but it is just wishful thinking man. If all we had to do was worry about estrogen...then we could all be muscular, horny, happy guys, with full heads of hair.

EIC - Great article.

JHarsh80 - When high estrogen is blunted, a high DHT level does fall. High DHT is almost like the body's way of compensating for high estrogen.

One of the best treatments for overweight men (or metabolic syndrome as well) is testosterone injections. This lowers estrogen and DHT.

IH, If testosterone goes 2 ways... 1) 5ar to dht and 2) aromatase to estrogen, wouldn't blunting estrogen leave more testosterone available to convert to dht (at least initially)? What would the body due in response to low estrogen? Wouldn't it boost testosterone production mistaking that for the problem, and in doing so result in more DHT conversion? I remember a guy named Bryan Shelton who would always post studies showing that estrogen was beneficial to hair growth whenever someone had the theory of the obese bald guy with estrogen dominance. Have you ever had any exchanges with him? I don't know if he's still around. It also happens that a very good treatment for underweight men is also testosterone injection

Also, keep in mind that as men age there testosterone and dht levels fall, while estrogen levels rise. Likewise, as men age, their hairloss accelerates. It seems to me that if hairloss is dependent primarily on dht then hairloss would be worst for men when they're in their low twenties when testosterone and dht levels at their peak, which obviously isn't the case. In fact, for most men, their hairloss seems to accelerate in their mid thirties, when testerone and dht start to decline and estrogen rises.

That said, I had my best regrowth when I started fin back when. So there must be something to the blocking dht factor... Probably, as EIC mentions above, the primary factor is neither dht nor estrogen by itself, but "rather an acceptable amount of DHT in the presence of unacceptable amounts of estrogen." That would explain why guys in their late teens and twenties aren't experiencing hairloss yet despite the high levels of both testosterone and dht ... they simply do not have the higher levels of estrogen necessary to wreak the havoc on the hair and prostate. So in this case the correct approach would be to leave dht alone while decreasing estrogen levels.

JHarsh80 - The poster you are referring to has a very conservative approach. However, clinical experience with hormones shows a very different picture. Simple logic does not always apply to hormones, and the more one looks into hormones, the more they will probably become confused.

Here's why, first there are several types of estrogens. While it's true the estradiol or in the form of birth control pills can protect against DHT, the consequence is gynecomastia and eventual estrogen dominance, poor libido, etc. When the more potent estrogen levels load up in the body, namely estradiol it begins to have a stronger influence on adipose tissue, which in itself is an organ that regulates hormones. The demasculization of the male species so to speak. Men just don't have as many estrogen receptors as females do.

More potent estrogens are difficult to breakdown in the body. The weaker forms of estrogen such as Estrone and Estriol are easier to metabolize. They are the preferred form and thus Enterolactone or other hormone balancers can help the body regulate DHT.

Essentially, I advocate using weaker forms of estrogen to combat potent forms of estrogen, which optimize testosterone levels.

The more testosterone, the stronger the vascular system is, the better glucose and insulin regulation is.

What about aromatization when testosterone is used? The older the male, the more likely this could happen (due to SHBG levels), so taking supplements that help break down estrogen and prevent excess aromatization. One of fastest ways to burn abdominal fat is to increase DHEA and T levels.

While writing this, johnt helped make of the points for me.

Fantastic posts in here. I wanted to throw something out here from my notes about cortisols relationship with insulin. If we remember from the Book of IH, insulin makes these hairloss androgens more potent (DHT).

The adrenals secrete adrenaline which mobilizes fatty acids. It works the opposite of insulin in that it clears the digestive system of any and all glucose and primes the muscles to only burn fatty acids, which is our body's preferred fuel during flight or fight. However, since insulin can trump the action of ANY hormone, adrenaline is not as successful as it otherwise might be due to chronically high insulin. By the same token, high insulin trumps the action of cortisol so therefore the glands must secrete more cortisol than usual to perform the same action, similar to the pancreas and insulin secretion. Again, insulin trumps the action of cortisol thus overworking the adrenals. I argue that if you get insulin under control, you'll find the adrenals will do what they're supposed to do.

There is an intimate relationship. The intimacy between adrenal fatigue and chronically high insulin is that insulin actually causes the adrenals to overwork just like the pancreas. When insulin is high, each gland has to secrete more hormone to do the same job it used to do with less. We are more stressed out because we consume the wrong diet, not vice versa. The diet is cause and adrenal fatigue, insulin resistance, obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cancer, etc, are the effects.

Intersting considering most of the stuff I've read always indicates that stress leads to blood sugar disorders and not the other way around. This seems to make more sense though.

Joejoebaggins wrote:Fantastic posts in here. I wanted to throw something out here from my notes about cortisols relationship with insulin. If we remember from the Book of IH, insulin makes these hairloss androgens more potent (DHT).

The adrenals secrete adrenaline which mobilizes fatty acids. It works the opposite of insulin in that it clears the digestive system of any and all glucose and primes the muscles to only burn fatty acids, which is our body's preferred fuel during flight or fight. However, since insulin can trump the action of ANY hormone, adrenaline is not as successful as it otherwise might be due to chronically high insulin. By the same token, high insulin trumps the action of cortisol so therefore the glands must secrete more cortisol than usual to perform the same action, similar to the pancreas and insulin secretion. Again, insulin trumps the action of cortisol thus overworking the adrenals. I argue that if you get insulin under control, you'll find the adrenals will do what they're supposed to do.

There is an intimate relationship. The intimacy between adrenal fatigue and chronically high insulin is that insulin actually causes the adrenals to overwork just like the pancreas. When insulin is high, each gland has to secrete more hormone to do the same job it used to do with less. We are more stressed out because we consume the wrong diet, not vice versa. The diet is cause and adrenal fatigue, insulin resistance, obesity, diabetes, hypertension, cancer, etc, are the effects.

Intersting considering most of the stuff I've read always indicates that stress leads to blood sugar disorders and not the other way around. This seems to make more sense though.

This is absolutely correct and I think there is no denying this. But the thing I learned from Schwarzbein is that too little insulin can also cause the adrenals to overwork. This is because the body perceives insufficient glucose consumption as an indication of famine, which also triggers an outpouring of adrenal hormones to, once again, mobilize stores for the fight or flight response. I can't believe I didn't post this interview with Schwarzbein sooner:

http://thetotaltoner.com/sprinciple.wmv

If you think about it...one of cortisol's main functions is the role it plays in the circadian rythm (to wake you up). What I remember from physiology is that sunlight triggers the retinas which send the signal that ultimately reaches the pineal gland and tells it to shut down melatonin production. In the absence of melatonin, combined with low blood sugar, cortisol is again produced which releases glucose by breaking down amino acids. This spike in blood sugar causes you to awaken.

So when you look at cortisol in this regard, it seems apparent that low blood sugar triggers cortisol release and not high blood sugar. This seems to contradict the notion that eating sugar stresses us out at face value, but in light of what JoeJoebaggins said about insulin trumping cortisol, it wouldn't be contradictory.

JHarsh80 wrote:If you think about it...one of cortisol's main functions is the role it plays in the circadian rythm (to wake you up). What I remember from physiology is that sunlight triggers the retinas which send the signal that ultimately reaches the pineal gland and tells it to shut down melatonin production. In the absence of melatonin, combined with low blood sugar, cortisol is again produced which releases glucose by breaking down amino acids. This spike in blood sugar causes you to awaken.

So when you look at cortisol in this regard, it seems apparent that low blood sugar triggers cortisol release and not high blood sugar. This seems to contradict the notion that eating sugar stresses us out at face value, but in light of what JoeJoebaggins said about insulin trumping cortisol, it wouldn't be contradictory.

Wow, JHarsh. That is very insightful. To compliment that, I have long suspected that high blood sugar is not the enemy, but rather high insulin. And while there is some correlation, the two are not one in the same. Thus, the key should not be to avoid foods which spike blood sugar, but to avoid foods which spike insulin. In fact, to manage cortisol, you would want the most bang (blood sugar increase) for the buck (insulin increase).

And this is where the Glycemic Index falls short; it only identifies foods which spike blood sugar without commenting on the relative spike of insulin. Thus, it suggests that a food like pumpkin should be avoided with a GI of 75 and champions fruit which usually has a GI in the 20s and 30s. But what the GI misses is that pumpkin results in an insulin secretion that is modest and perfectly matches its effect on blood sugar. Fruit, meanwhile, spikes insulin like crazy.

So in sum, you do not want to go too low or too high when it comes to carbs. And you want to focus on insulin secretion NOT blood sugar increases when selecting carb types.

EIC/JHarsh80 - Great points.

CausticSymmetry wrote:EIC - Great article.

JHarsh80 - When high estrogen is blunted, a high DHT level does fall. High DHT is almost like the body's way of compensating for high estrogen.

One of the best treatments for overweight men (or metabolic syndrome as well) is testosterone injections. This lowers estrogen and DHT.

Where are you getting your information from on "Testosterone injections lower estrogen"? If fact when you raise Testosterone levels increase so do your estrogen levels. This is why body builders who use Anabolic Steroids get gynecomastia. For those who get sides from Propecia its usually from raised estrogen-not just lowering DHT.

jasonshadow - This isn't in the context of steroids, but rather in a state of low testosterone. Metabolic syndrome and even mild insulin resistance is associated with declining levels of testosterone.

Depending on age, the type of testosterone used is quite important, the respective levels of T and free T in the user are considered.

johnt wrote:

That said, I had my best regrowth when I started fin back when. So there must be something to the blocking dht factor... Probably, as EIC mentions above, the primary factor is neither dht nor estrogen by itself, but "rather an acceptable amount of DHT in the presence of unacceptable amounts of estrogen." That would explain why guys in their late teens and twenties aren't experiencing hairloss yet despite the high levels of both testosterone and dht ... they simply do not have the higher levels of estrogen necessary to wreak the havoc on the hair and prostate. So in this case the correct approach would be to leave dht alone while decreasing estrogen levels.

Johnt, I forgot to address this. I noticed my temples starting to recede at 18. I knew guys that were already going bald in high school. Many of the guys on these hair forums are in their early 20's. In my experience, I have almost observed the opposite of what you are describing. I usually see some celebrity (because they are the easiest to observe over time) who starts to lose hair in their 20's and I think "oh he's going bald". Then almost 10 years later their hair hasn't gotten that much worse. Ashton Kutcher, Ben affleck, Heath Ledger, are a couple that come to mind. I realize that celebrities get transplants and have makeup artists etc. but I'm just using them because they are in the public eye so much. I also have some friends who I thought would be bald by now, who do nothing to stop hairloss, and their hair just kind of started receeding and stopped. Some people may call this the "mature" hairline, but I have never really bought that line. I think the "mature" hairline is just the early stages of recession before it becomes apparent that they are losing their hair.

jasonshadow wrote:

Where are you getting your information from on "Testosterone injections lower estrogen"? If fact when you raise Testosterone levels increase so do your estrogen levels. This is why body builders who use Anabolic Steroids get gynecomastia. For those who get sides from Propecia its usually from raised estrogen-not just lowering DHT.

It is not quite so simple. An increase in testosterone does not automatically lead to an increase of estrogen. Take, for example, Guy A who is 7% body fat and Guy B who is 20% body fat. If you give them both 100 mg. of testosterone, Guy A is going to turn much less of that into estrogen than Guy B who is, comparatively speaking, an aromatase factory.

If I do nothing else for the internet understanding of hair loss, I want to dispel the notion that having high testosterone causes hair loss. It can't be said enough, but balding men are suffering from too little, not too much testosterone. I know that Caustic holds this exact same view.

Ideally, men will have high testosterone and low estrogen. The ratio should be something like 500:1. Men have problems when the ratio gets closer to 50:1. I think estrogen comes from two sources: production and ingestion. Ingestion is from xenoestrogens and the body's failure to clear them. Production comes from aromatization of androgens.

You can keep a lid on ingestion by limiting exposure to enviromental estrogens (obvious) and facilitating the body's detox pathways (veggies, calcium d-glucarate, DIM, kombucha, vitamin C, resveratrol, B vitamins, probiotics, liver (dessicated or otherwise), bone broths). In this regard, the more the better.

Countering production, however, is a trickier thing--you don't want to go gonzo with aromatase inhibitors (AI) because you can drive estrogen too low. So here the goal should be avoiding an overproduction of aromatase. The best way to do this is to trim down and get to 10% bodyfat or lower. On top of that, you can use mild AIs like lignans which will not drive estrogen into the ground. I honestly feel that that's all you need.

But, again, all of this overlooks the cortisol/inflammation pathway of hairloss, wherein adrenal fatigue is the issue.

JH--

Funny that you bring up Heath and Ben...

I've noted to myself over the years how Heath's hairline has become more and more apparent, culminating in his final Joker role.

As for Ben, there was actually a thread on Regrowth a while ago where someone basically proved that he wears a rug!

EIC wrote:

JHarsh80 wrote:If you think about it...one of cortisol's main functions is the role it plays in the circadian rythm (to wake you up). What I remember from physiology is that sunlight triggers the retinas which send the signal that ultimately reaches the pineal gland and tells it to shut down melatonin production. In the absence of melatonin, combined with low blood sugar, cortisol is again produced which releases glucose by breaking down amino acids. This spike in blood sugar causes you to awaken.

So when you look at cortisol in this regard, it seems apparent that low blood sugar triggers cortisol release and not high blood sugar. This seems to contradict the notion that eating sugar stresses us out at face value, but in light of what JoeJoebaggins said about insulin trumping cortisol, it wouldn't be contradictory.

Wow, JHarsh. That is very insightful. To compliment that, I have long suspected that high blood sugar is not the enemy, but rather high insulin. And while there is some correlation, the two are not one in the same. Thus, the key should not be to avoid foods which spike blood sugar, but to avoid foods which spike insulin. In fact, to manage cortisol, you would want the most bang (blood sugar increase) for the buck (insulin increase).

And this is where the Glycemic Index falls short; it only identifies foods which spike blood sugar without commenting on the relative spike of insulin. Thus, it suggests that a food like pumpkin should be avoided with a GI of 75 and champions fruit which usually has a GI in the 20s and 30s. But what the GI misses is that pumpkin results in an insulin secretion that is modest and perfectly matches its effect on blood sugar. Fruit, meanwhile, spikes insulin like crazy.

So in sum, you do not want to go too low or too high when it comes to carbs. And you want to focus on insulin secretion NOT blood sugar increases when selecting carb types.

Where can I find out what amount of insulin secretion is caused by different foods?

scottyc33 wrote:
Where can I find out what amount of insulin secretion is caused by different foods?

See the table labeled "Glycemic Index vs. Insulin Response" in Terry Shintani’s book The Good Carbohydrate Revolution. In the meantime the four worst offenders (i.e., foods causing an oversecretion of insulin), in order, are:

Candy bar
Cookie
Fruit
Breakfast cereal

The foods that caused the most tempered, moderate secretion of insulin are:

Whole intact grains
Pasta
Legumes
Grain bread

Tubers are right in the mix with the grains and legumes. What's funny is that bodybuilders knew this for years. Go back to the late '80s and '90s and you see lots of recommendations to eat meals with protein, some fat, and moderate whole grains or potatoes. This is all over Arnold's Encyclopedia of Modern Bodybuilding. That diet was the best way to put on lean mass and keep hormones balanced. We threw the baby out with the bath water with the low carb revolution.

I watched the vid and she seems pretty legit, but I still haven't heard of too many people with low insulin besides those with diabetes. She even advocates a keto diet in the vid if one has insulin resistance, which troubles most prematurely balding men.

nidhogge wrote:JH--

Funny that you bring up Heath and Ben...

I've noted to myself over the years how Heath's hairline has become more and more apparent, culminating in his final Joker role.

As for Ben, there was actually a thread on Regrowth a while ago where someone basically proved that he wears a rug!

NH,

THey may be bad examples, but what I was trying to say is that in my observation it often seems that someone has a solid hairline, and then it becomes obvious to me that they have receded quite rapidly in the last year or so. it is after this initial observation that I tend to keep a mental note of their recession year to year, and what surprises me is that they continue to get worse yes, but the speed of the progression seems to slow way down. This is my own personal experience as well. At first I noticed I went from solid to widoes peaks and everyone said "you're not losing your hair" but ever since then it has slowly receded more and more. It was that initial recession that seems to have been the quickest though. I agree that Heath looked the worst in his Joker role, but keep in mind that he had unusually long hair for him in that role, and that I remember watching that corny "Knight's Tale" movie years ago thinking "wow, this guy is going to go bald." It almost seems like after you reach between a NW 1 and 2 in some individuals...The hair seems to linger there for a long time and very gradually get worse. I dunno....maybe someone like Tim Allen? I can't think of actors right now.

Joejoebaggins wrote:I watched the vid and she seems pretty legit, but I still haven't heard of too many people with low insulin besides those with diabetes. She even advocates a keto diet in the vid if one has insulin resistance, which troubles most prematurely balding men.

The keto diet is temporary. It is sort of like the induction phase for the Atkins diet to promote insulin sensitivity. Thereafter, one shifts to a more balanced diet for maintenance.

EIC wrote:

Joejoebaggins wrote:I watched the vid and she seems pretty legit, but I still haven't heard of too many people with low insulin besides those with diabetes. She even advocates a keto diet in the vid if one has insulin resistance, which troubles most prematurely balding men.

The keto diet is temporary. It is sort of like the induction phase for the Atkins diet to promote insulin sensitivity. Thereafter, one shifts to a more balanced diet for maintenance.

I really appreciate you posting that vid, EIC. I sent it to my sister who has PCOS and is clueless. She has really taken to it.

Joejoebaggins wrote:

I really appreciate you posting that vid, EIC. I sent it to my sister who has PCOS and is clueless. She has really taken to it.

No problem, Joejoe. I think Dr. Schwarzbein has a lot of good ideas. It especially helps that she is a woman; makes a lot of women take her more seriously, I think. I have given her stuff to my mom, sister, and girlfriend.

EIC - Yeah, great video, I hope the rest of us see it. It's a good set of principles. I was surprised at hearing her own story.

I remember when I was really young, I knew that candy and soda and other things were like a "lift," and didn't seem all that much different from a drug. I thought then, that it's amazing they are legal considering everything else the government likes to ban. I didn't know about the power of lobbies back then, but anyway--I'm not for banning anything, but always considered these foods not much different from a drug.

Funny that when she was a kid, she assumed her problems were "genetic." When I hear medical professions use those words, it tells me they have no clue.