Book Review & Synopsis: I Broke The Mystery Of Male Pattern Baldness.

What misterE provided is a biased review. He was disappointed because he was looking for 'new' information that will agree with his theory that: physical exercises and healthy diet that prevent CVDs will also prevent MPB.

If he had read the excerpts, he would not have bought the book and not be disappointed because it clearly contradicts his theories.

While the author sites studies that associate CVD with MPB, he clearly stated that healthy diets will NOT prevent baldness and that physical exercises might actually contribute to hair loss by siting balding athletes.

Something seems to be right with misterE's theories but something seems to be missing. Tons of epidemiological studies would have shown a direct correlation with diet and hair loss. (Diet is the most sought after factor in the study of medical conditions. The author is an epidemiologists which entitles you to a free copy of your are one)

It is even more ironic for misterE to describe some portions as 'silly' - something which he is now applying himself and using information he read from the book. In the excerpts, the author has described his own measures as seemingly 'absurd and preposterous' but only to modern 'civilized' men.

While it took misterE to review the book a few hours after he received the book, it contains many details that would have physiologists scratching their baldheads for weeks or even months.

Did you get a 'graphic and detailed review' of the book? No, you got a biased review. Is misterE 'generous' for providing COPYRIGHTED content for everyone to read for "free"? Probably not because he was looking for information to support his theories and missed the details that are unique to the book that may be more important to other readers.

It takes a panel of experts to review even the most silly and absurd theories - not by amateurs who are bent on pushing their own.

just admit you're the author?

misterE's many post shows he has his own agenda on CVDs. He will sorta have tendencies to become bias.

the way i see it, who cares it if it's copyrighted. If i had a cure for MPB, i'd give it away for free. Also, if what was presented in that book really did work, I assure you, i'd send the author a cheque of whatever the book cost. Also, the fact is the book mentions that a chair causes MPB, blood circuation. Sorry but that blows all credibility from this book out of the water.

Then misterE shouldnt be sitting Indian style

This is my first post in this forum although I visited it many times. Good work Inmortal Hair
I am astonished when the author of the book talks about the contact of the scalp with the pillow when we rest trying to explain the special pattern of common hairloss. He aduced problems with blood stream, but in my own theory The problems are with sebum flow.
This is mi idea www.againstalopeciaandbaldness.com

OTOH here is a photo of a woman with hairloss in an native/natural enviroment.
http://yfrog.com/0spalawanoswebj

Comments are wellcome
Armando

fender89 wrote: blood circuation. Sorry but that blows all credibility from this book out of the water.

A reference from the book (no.24) says that Blood vessels hold the Key to thicker hair growth. A google search showed this study from Massachusetts General Hospital

Says that thicker blood vessels lead to thicker hair growth in animal experiments. Seems like the book as some backing as far as blood circulation.

misterE thanks for posting that, it was interesting.

Based on his post, it seems that dmonitor is the author. But he repeatedly misspells "cite" as "site". I would expect that someone with a PhD in a biomedical science would know how to spell "cite". So, perhaps the author is lying in saying that he's a PhD, or dmonitor isn't really the author?

As for the actual theories, I'm still curious.

misterE, if being sedentary is bad, but exercise is counterproductive, then what does the author suggest we do?

crincrin wrote:misterE, if being sedentary is bad, but exercise is counterproductive, then what does the author suggest we do?

That's the paradox.

crincrin wrote:he repeatedly misspells "cite" as "site". I would expect that someone with a PhD in a biomedical science would know how to spell "cite". So, perhaps the author is lying in saying that he's a PhD, or dmonitor isn't really the author?

If he's from a non-english speaking country that would be excusable.

I am glad Mr. E bough the book, thanks for sharing your review.. A lot of good tips I am going to jot down. I do not think it was a waste of money, I for one think there may be merit to sitting indian style.. everything else in the book makes sense to me!

Did humans evolve to sit on chairs? no, we only started using chairs recently, before that we always sat on the floor.

It's not just diet, not just one thing, it's so many things.. diet, physical activity (not heavy exercise or long cardio exercise but more paleo exercise), sun exposure, bare-foot walking (posture and earthing), healthy stress levels, healthy enjoyment of life outdoors and with others, earthing often, sleeping enough, cold showers, not to mention not getting exposed to modern day toxins that are everywhere, and more..

Some opt for the chemical / diet approach but i think the answer to hair loss is much more holistic than chemical-based.

Thanks teacup I was beginning to think that this book had no friends. What is being said in the book is hair loss has no single solution because biology is a very extremely complex process. If you miss just one important element along the long chain of the mechanism, you lose your hair.

barefoot, are you the author? I'm not an enemy of the book, I think the theories are very interesting. I just tend to be skeptical, and I can't get myself to buy the book just yet.

Author? No but I have a copy And I knew the webmaster of the books website. (I even have a bookhairs.com email address ) I insisted that he introduce me to the author but it turned out that he only knew the editor whom I already met. The book was originaly written in a native language from my country that even I wouldn't understand. It took two translators to translate the book in english. (we have about 40 languages and diminishing fast). I was told that the author works with a team that provides free medical healthcare in remote areas. The editor (half-american who lived in my country since birth) actually called me to observe this thread. By the way there is another edition that includes the results of the last experiment. You can get updates if you bought the original copy.

fender89 wrote:who cares it if it's copyrighted. If i had a cure for MPB, i'd give it away for free. ... the book mentions that a chair causes MPB ...

WHO CARES IF IT'S COPYRIGHTED?? Anyone can give away content of his own writing but never those that belong to someone else. It simply is immoral to give away something that is not yours to give.
The book never mentions cure. It's always prevention.
The book never mentioned that a chair causes MPB. A chair is an inaimate object. It doesn't do anything. Thats what we get for receiving second hand information. Look to the excerpts and there is a mention of "can behavior cause baldness"

yeah, who cares if it's copyrighted when it's just a scam. the hairloss industry is extremely immoral by the way. Mind you 2 wrongs don't make a right, i know.

And sorry i phrased my last sentence wrong, the first thing you quoted me on that is. I meant, the credibility in my opinion gets blown out of the water when the author begins talking about chairs. Seriously. Does that mean if a caveman started sittin on a rock everyday for a while, he was going to go bald? I don't even sit on a chair properly most of the time, i put my feet up etc. Way too many variables there. It is ridiculous even taking that seriously. If you want good blood circulation, exercise alot. Don't start sittin on the floor indian style..

infact, nevermind. I was going to elaborate further but, anyone who has interest in this book, go ahead and be interested. I'll stop replying on this thread lol. Good luck if you hope it prevents anyones hairloss.

FWIW, appears the author is getting into the info regarding accupuncture or chi, etc..

Just because Western medicine has a hard time explaining doesn't mean it's not true. Some of the most dramatic things I've witnessed in my life were corrected by Eastern medicine.

Here is some info that I assume the author is trying to convey

Chairs aren’t really healthy for humans. Aside form the fact that most people slouch in them and develop poor postural habits... the chair itself shortens a muscle called the hip flexor. (This is the muscle used to raise your leg in a front kick). The hip flexor runs from the leg through the pelvis and attaches to the small of the back. Prolonged sitting shortens it and then pulls our lower back out of alignment and straining to support the full eight of our upper body.

lower back is the mansion of the Kidney’s, meaning that the energy or Qi surrounding the area is mostly associated with them.

http://www.meridian-acupuncture-clinic.com/Acupuncture-for-Martial-Arts-Bad-Back-Injuries.html

In Eastern medicine, it's been mentioned kidneys and liver are the cause of hair loss. chairs... not so crazy when thinking from an Eastern medicine.

fender89 wrote:yeah, who cares if it's copyrighted when it's just a scam. the hairloss industry is extremely immoral

If you have that mind set why bother looking for answers? Scam or not, written material is copyrighted and protected by law.

fender89 wrote:And sorry i phrased my last sentence wrong, the first thing you quoted me on that is.

Apology accepted I think.

fender89 wrote:I meant, the credibility in my opinion gets blown out of the water when the author begins talking about chairs. Seriously. Does that mean if a caveman started sittin on a rock everyday for a while, he was going to go bald? I don't even sit on a chair properly most of the time, i put my feet up etc. Way too many variables there. It is ridiculous even taking that seriously. If you want good blood circulation, exercise alot. Don't start sittin on the floor indian style..

Google neurophysiology and neurovascular. You can find these words in the book's Table of Contents. It might give you some answers because I can't answer your question. I will be giving away information that doesn't belong to me.

Why is "copyright" being thrown around in this thread? What MisterE wrote easily falls under fair use. I could write a 20 page, in-depth analysis of the book and it would still constitute fair use.

Also, copyright law pertains to the the way the owner expressed him/herself, not to the ideas within the book. Ideas are fair game.

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

http://www-sul.stanford.edu/cpyright.html

(domonitor editing/quoting the author)
Presenting a counterargument TO a BOOK (arguing with a book) is not a book review. Counterarguments are presented in communications that allows the author to respond and in private should the author choose to.

A book should be reviewed within its own merits and done by experts in the same discipline as the author's or related sciences with no agenda of their own and must present their credentials which is why free copies are made available to them.

It is impossible for an amateur or even an expert to review this book in one day when my own peers have not returned theirs for months. One cannot pick out bits and pieces of a book and throw them to the public because partial information can make them appear absurd particularly if the book contains five paradoxes with linkages that span the entire book.

To answer his question (which does not deserve an answer) of why DHT was never mentioned in the book is this: the evidence that DHT adversely affects hair follicles is a BELIEF rather than fact. How do we know this?

In the Propecia website this phrase can be found: "Scientists BELIEVE ... DHT" . What does BELIEVE mean in the scientific community? It means that there is no solid evidence of adversity or causation and frees both the maker of Propecia and their scientists from possible ridicule or even legal proceedings.

It's surprising how pervasive this subject of DHT is on the internet when Propecia and its scientists were so careful with their choice of words. 'Experts' who regurgitate DHT's supposed adverse effects never conducted their own study. They are copycats.- (Edited by dmonitor for the author)
------
There you go. Words from a real researcher. By the way, the book says sitting with raised feet is not very effective but it helps. Something miserE missed for skimming the pages rather than reading it. I am almost sure that if misterE reads the entire book several times over, he might change his mind if it widens his field of vision.

empty wrote:... I could write a 20 page, in-depth analysis of the book and it would still constitute fair use. Also, copyright law pertains to the the way the owner expressed him/herself, not to the ideas within the book. Ideas are fair game.

You're right but if you wrote a book and read his prior posts trumpeting the words

misterE wrote:...graphic details of its contents and bring out the information for everyone to read for free

won't you be alarmed? Those words can subject him to litigation. He might still win in court but bringing him to court is enough.

Was he exercising his first amendment rights or hiding behind it while making himself look generous and kind?

Crying out loud barefoot, enough already with the copyright blurb - nobody's interested. Mister E read the book, gave his opinion, we read it and chose to believe him or the book. You're clearly the author's brother, sister, cousin, best mate or golf buddy so your opinion could be as biased as his. End of.

barefoot wrote:

empty wrote:... I could write a 20 page, in-depth analysis of the book and it would still constitute fair use. Also, copyright law pertains to the the way the owner expressed him/herself, not to the ideas within the book. Ideas are fair game.

You're right but if you wrote a book and read his prior posts trumpeting the words

misterE wrote:...graphic details of its contents and bring out the information for everyone to read for free

won't you be alarmed? Those words can subject him to litigation. He might still win in court but bringing him to court is enough.

Was he exercising his first amendment rights or hiding behind it while making himself look generous and kind?

I suppose his use may fall under this part of fair use:

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Then again, scathing negative reviews often hurt the potential market for/value of the work. You could go after hundreds of people on amazon.com on this same line of reasoning.

But it doesn't happen. Because we're allowed to do this.

What's funny is that, expert or no, if he had written a positive review of the book revealing the same level of detail, you wouldn't have said anything.

Stoke10 wrote:Nobody's interested

You don't have to visit the thread if you're not.

empty wrote:What's funny is that, expert or no, if he had written a positive review of the book revealing the same level of detail, you wouldn't have said anything.

Ha ha. I guess it will be similar to someone saying you look like a monkey and you punch him while saying you look like brad pitt would be another. He goes free and you're in jail. That's first amendment.