Re: Is treating environmental issues enough to reverse hairloss?

Amaranthaceae Fri Jul 27, 2012 6:53 am

Ban Moby.

moby Fri Jul 27, 2012 7:42 am

cpio wrote:
Ban Moby.

are you kidding me? Just because I think circulation theory is shit you want to ban me? Why isn't CS responding to these kinds of circulation threads???

LawOfThelema Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:31 am

SlowMoe wrote:
moby wrote:or how about the alternative: botox downregulates inflammation -> protein synthesis increases -> follicles start regenerating

Sir, please dont take this to heart, but you have been heavily brainwashed into thinking that our scalp does not need blood to be healthy. That just shows the power of the internet.

It is painfully obvious that hair loss is prevalent in the galea region. Galea region = tight skin. Tight skin= poor blood/ lymph flow.

Remove tension, increase blood flow, hair growth returns to normal. This is the simplest, most logical explanation.

lol brainwashing? how about the abject poverty of evidence that lack of blood flow is a cause of balding.

cpio wrote:
Ban Moby.

yes, ban those who dont partake in the echo chamber.

tooyoung Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:42 am

cpio wrote:
Ban Moby.

For what reason?

SlowMoe Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:57 am

Circulation is bad, mmmkay

AL123 Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:31 am

moby wrote:or how about the alternative: botox downregulates inflammation -> protein synthesis increases -> follicles start regenerating

+1

AL123 Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:31 am

Beebrox wrote:
SlowMoe wrote:Thank you breebox. Are you saying that somehow a toxin such as botox actually somehow regrew hair in it's own?

I think it should be plain as day to see what happened in that study; scalp tension went away, hair regrowth began. Simple as that.
Also, I realize that we are not talking about using botox here, but I can keep my scalp muscles pretty much at a full stare of relaxation throughout the day now, so IMO that, plus the brushing, ginko and inversion should be at least as efficient at delivering blood to my scalp, probably much better.

You know also that wounding triggers regeneration (on healthy individuals) including on your scalp, do you? You know that manually methods are only one aspect of how to remove tension/ increase blood flow. Do you know, you are not credible regrower for this site's standards with applying minox on your scalp? You know everything you promote was already discussed and it's already in different regimens used by various people including mine? You've heard about alopecia areata? You dont try to be constructive, do you?

I think this are credible questions for you, based on your actions. You behave like your found solution for hairloss that works every person in the planet. And hidding people speculation that your hair will last after you quit your regimen... Hope they will.

I wouldn't mind if you've talked just about manual techniques if your regimen would consist 100% manual approaches and not ginko/topicals-minox, etc. But what you are doing is propaganda discrediting all other...You are testimonial for your regimen, nothing less and sorry to think loud- nothing more.

And massaging head all day is maybe not an option for someone, live inverted life to let gravity do the work also not, although i agree it's an good option and agree that blood/lymph flow is very important too, maybe even underestimaded.

+1

AL123 Fri Jul 27, 2012 9:32 am

LawOfThelema wrote:
SlowMoe wrote:
moby wrote:or how about the alternative: botox downregulates inflammation -> protein synthesis increases -> follicles start regenerating

Sir, please dont take this to heart, but you have been heavily brainwashed into thinking that our scalp does not need blood to be healthy. That just shows the power of the internet.

It is painfully obvious that hair loss is prevalent in the galea region. Galea region = tight skin. Tight skin= poor blood/ lymph flow.

Remove tension, increase blood flow, hair growth returns to normal. This is the simplest, most logical explanation.

lol brainwashing? how about the abject poverty of evidence that lack of blood flow is a cause of balding.

cpio wrote:
Ban Moby.

yes, ban those who dont partake in the echo chamber.

+1

Duketronix Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:18 am

Agree with what Beebrox said.

But I also think moby needs to chill out and take a deep breath before his posts his responses. They're a little more aggressive than is necessary. That type of posting tends to snowball and derail topics pretty badly.
Maybe you're not as angry as you sound moby, but it comes across like you're in a rage when you respond sometimes. Otherwise I think he's welcome to his opinions.

schpiloch123 Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:58 am

On this note I'm going to sign out. I have come to realize that many people on this forum go round and round in circles looking for something scientifically proven tested and documented to come along and save them. So many people just blow hot air around here and very few have much success. They want a magical supplement or lotion to cure it but that's not going to happen.

I think gpb described it as dragging their brains along the floor. People offer a solution but so many try and avoid it. It is so frustrating and frankly depressing to be around so many dull knuckle heads waiting like lemmings.

This is a great forum and I thanks the stars I found it, but there is a definite bias towards supplementation which bugs me and a real lack of perseverance and logic.

I hope every body can solve their loss because its a shitty situation. I genuinely feel that we have found the common denominator with blood flow but too many are to blind to see it.

I may still private message but I doubt ill post. It's pointless and a waste of time, people telling others that they are wrong solely because they disagree with what they are doing sucks.

987 Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:09 am

There is no reason to say this works better than that, or that works better than this, we are all different and loose hair for different reasons, even if those reasons can some how be connected. So while people argue about what is more effective, I just employ all methods... As long as its not a drug Ill do it. So if it takes me eating perfectly, taking a long list of supplements, thyroid, detox, doing Scalp massage/exercises, inversion etc, as well as natural inhibition of 5AR/dht and there's no draw back other than time and funds then why not. Why waste time hoping your choice of action is the right one, process of elimination people stop playing around, there is no "better" way to treat your condition, just what works for YOU. Cover all basis and be done with it and resume normal (healthy) life...

SlowMoe Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:15 pm

Schlipoch, you read my mind.

Peace

gg4545 Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:51 pm

i agree slowmoe!

Even though the body is a maze complete with tons of twists and turns you guys may be using one of a few methods i believe will work for almost anyone! Really the science behind it is pointless to break down because you know it works! I see that you are very keen on sharing this with everyone and i applaud you for this!!! Others maybe not so much but always remember that if it works for you screw the hows and whys because the proof will speak for itself

LawOfThelema Fri Jul 27, 2012 5:54 pm

the elephant in the room is that slow moe uses rogaine. it would be not unlike someone using finasteride while telling you that what you really need to do with your hair loss is invert and eat a good diet. it comes across as bullshitty. now, i dont have any problem with that. people use rogaine because the damn thing generates some visible results. if you are so confidant in your manual approach then drop the synthetic pharmaceutical and do the all natural approach. but you too, are an opportunist, and know that minoxidil generates results, so i doubt you will cease it, especially considering that you have probably already developed dependent growth and are now bound to it if you dont want to lose ground. you have probably convinced yourself that using minoxidil is an environmental factor despite that it is a chemical intervention that directly intervenes on the balding process, however near the end of the chain it's mechanism of action is.

Amaranthaceae Sat Jul 28, 2012 2:18 am

Rogaine/Minoxidil works as a vasolidator and increase bloodflow into the follicles. That Minoxodil actually work to some extent adds clearly add to the validity of the bloodflow theory. However there are much better ways of stimulating blood to the scalp than using a drug.

LawOfThelema wrote:the elephant in the room is that slow moe uses rogaine. it would be not unlike someone using finasteride while telling you that what you really need to do with your hair loss is invert and eat a good diet. it comes across as bullshitty. now, i dont have any problem with that. people use rogaine because the damn thing generates some visible results. if you are so confidant in your manual approach then drop the synthetic pharmaceutical and do the all natural approach. but you too, are an opportunist, and know that minoxidil generates results, so i doubt you will cease it, especially considering that you have probably already developed dependent growth and are now bound to it if you dont want to lose ground. you have probably convinced yourself that using minoxidil is an environmental factor despite that it is a chemical intervention that directly intervenes on the balding process, however near the end of the chain it's mechanism of action is.

moby Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:58 am

cpio wrote:
Rogaine/Minoxidil works as a vasolidator and increase bloodflow into the follicles. That Minoxodil actually work to some extent adds clearly add to the validity of the bloodflow theory. However there are much better ways of stimulating blood to the scalp than using a drug.

please please please listen to me: when they discovered that ORAL minoxidil grows hair, they tried to make a topical minoxidil and apply it to the scalp - it worked. Then they tried other VASOLIDATORS to see which one would be most effective. NONE OF THEM WERE. Only minoxidil was working. We now know why: because it increases PGE2 which is responsible for hair cycling thus extending hair cycles, making hair longer and thicker at least temporary. Prostaglandins are imbalanced in AGA remember?

It has nothing to do with circulation.

Amaranthaceae Sat Jul 28, 2012 5:19 am

AS54 Sat Jul 28, 2012 5:34 am

Banning one who disagrees with a held idea will remove any credit this forum has, so long as they are presenting their opinions in a healthy, respectful way. This has been a dialogue between two opposing ideas. It should remain that way, as we shouldn't just accept an idea at first glance. Usually, the overtly frustrated party in an argument tends to be the one who is least secure in their assertions. The fact is, I agree that circulation is a factor, and probably an important one. Using just plain common sense, the blood is the delivery mechanism of all nutrients to the cells and also oxygen. Right. But until the proper evidence comes down the pipeline that demonstrates circulation as the definitive cause, we can't suddenly advance circulation up the chain of relevance above all other things simply because its the most novel idea brought up here recently. That just isn't good scientific thinking, and from my take on things, this forum was founded by persons interested in a scientific approach to a solution. Now granted, we can't wait to try new things until research catches up, and more power to those who are trying these manual methods and benefiting, but that doesn't come close to accounting for every variable in a massively multi-variate physiological process. If you plan on creating a thread on a site such as this, where its obvious that members hold several different theories up to scrutiny, don't be surprised when your assertions are looked at with scrutiny, especially when the body of research supporting it is minimal. Yes, you have your observations to back you up, and for some that is enough. Enough to try it and see. For some it won't ever be enough. We just have to get right with that. And for a site that is dedicated to scientific solutions, I do have to agree that presenting something like manual methods as being the definitive solution to hairloss while also being on hairloss drugs is going to undermine your arguments in some people's minds. I mean, you can hardly control from any variables while being on those drugs simultaneously. Now in light of the fact that the research is lagging behind, if someone was to show real results through nothing else besides diet, training, vitamins & minerals, perhaps a broad antioxidant, and manual methods then we'd have something at least anecdotal we could latch onto given our trust of most members on this forum. But being that this is hub of research, at this point, the manual "methoders", in a strictly scientific scope, can only say that they are trying something and having success, nothing less, nothing more.

SlowMoe Sat Jul 28, 2012 7:22 am

Oh my gosh.

Am I the only one who read that study and saw that scalp tension was relieved, normal blood flow was returned, and an average of 18% regrowth was observed?

Why is this so hard to understand? You have to be in a serious state of denial or a dumbass to read that and believe that restricted blood/ lymph flow is causing us to lose our hair! They didn't offer the subjects DHT blockers, or thyroid supplements or anything! It's painfully obvious!!!

And why the hell do you guys keep referring to my minoxidil usage? I that all you've got to defend your stand that bloodflow isn't as important as it obviously is? I don't think I used my situation as evidence one time, and if I did lead anyone to believe that, I apologize for that. But if everyone could wake up damn near every vellus hair on his scalp within 2 months on minoxidil, I doubt there would be any more bald guys walking around.

I based my faith in the blood flow theory not only on the fact that my hair loss stopped BEFORE I started the ZX42, not only on the fact that the study I posted (actually J87) makes it clear as DAY that all that is needed to reverse hairloss is loosen the galea and return normal blood flow, but on what should be a COMMON SENSE observation that bald scalps are generally tight, scalp anatomy makes it dead obvious, distance from heart, etc. If you don't believe, it's because you don't want to believe. And I think that it's appalling that less recognition is given to this groundbreaking study (perhaps not to damage supplement sales). Yeah, I went there.

So that's it. I believe I have said enough, I really dont think there's anything left to argue here. I believe in the months to come there will be more and more evidence to support my case. Maybe I'll return then.

Good luck
-Slow

LawOfThelema Sat Jul 28, 2012 7:34 am

Rogaine/Minoxidil works as a vasolidator and increase bloodflow into the follicles.

This is one hypothesis why minox works. Others have been proposed. That it is a vasodilator doesn't mean that it's effect on hair growth is coming from it's vasodilatory effect.

^ I didn't read every post in this thread. Which study are you referring to exactly? Could you repost it?

AS54 Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:08 am

SlowMoe,

Again. I'm not discrediting the circulation theories. I think it is plausible. I'm just saying some of the reaction that some of the posters have gotten here for disagreeing with you is inappropriate, given that it is still a theory. One study does not prove this theory correct, not by a long shot. For that one study, this forum probably contains hundreds of other studies showing hair growth from means that aren't tied directly to blood flow. For this reason, I'm simply trying to say that just because this blood flow idea is the coolest kid to move into the neighborhood lately, doesn't mean posters disagreeing with it should be getting ridiculed. It certainly doesn't beg all of these notions that manual methods are going to regrow all of your hair and that they are all that is necessary. I'm just stressing that we need to keep things in perspective and foster a healthy dialogue and not become dogmatic about an idea, again an idea, that we are excited about. Thats just poor reasoning.

And that study does not prove anything related to the blood flow theory. All that it can do, and I mean all, is help us formulate some good hypotheses for further research. It is great for asking more questions in a sense. While we can speculate that it was due to relaxing musculature and increasing circulation, that study did not prove that. There could have been other effects of the botulinum toxin that were spurring on hairgrowth. Botulinum toxin has been shown to be a strong anti-inflammatory in certain contexts. (http://www.google.com/patents/US7537773 Perhaps it is having some effect on pathogens in local scalp tissue. Perhaps it is mediating lipid metabolism. We just don't KNOW from the study. Again, I'm all for taking a pragmatic approach and trying things. But resorting to dogma with such little evidence is not a good way of approaching things, and bashing somebody for being skeptical and not bowing down to the single study you posted is bs. We await further research. If experiments are working for you and others great. And your idea was perfect, track your results in a well controlled (as best as possible) manner and that means no pharmaceuticals and come back with the results. I do believe circulation is a component and I'd love to see what you come up with.

LawOfThelema Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:29 am

Oh, the botox study? Was that the one Malinak uses as a key reference for his theory, from some school of plastic surgery in canada?

When I scanned the abstract what I thought was the parameters they used for regrowth were not at all clear. Were they counting hairs, were they measuring thickness, were they weighing hair shaft, etc. It looked more like a study conducted for a patent in terms of it's vagueness.

And yeah, one study generally doesn't prove anything.

If someone has the link, I'd like to look it over again.

Mastery Sat Jul 28, 2012 3:14 pm

rdkml wrote:
cpio wrote:
Why would an infection only spread to the MPB areas, why not to the lower parts of
the head?

It's well known specific pathogens target specific areas of the body.

For example, regarding hair loss, there have been studies done showing specific pathogens associated with androgenic areata which have been posted on this site. And while there haven't been studies done showing if there has been increased hair growth after treating for those specific pathogens it would sound plausible.

And while there haven't been any studies on androgenic alopecia, independent researchers have found other pathogens connected with androgenic alopecia such as Dr. Sutherland. Dr. Sutherland originally found this one. While treating his son for it, his hair loss stopped. The frequency set was later expanded upon with research found from the internet by newport and theorized it was this specific virus that was found. "This virus (Dicistroviridae or Silkworm virus) infects certain soft tissue; heart valve, penis, scalp, larinx, soft tissue of knee, urogenital lining, more..."

Other researchers have used others as well and found improvement with their battle in fighting hair loss. Most of the original ones don't appear to visit this forum anymore or rarely do.

But as has been mentionedi in the past, what keeps most people with hair loss scratching their heads wondering what's going on is biofilm. Pathogens hide out in biofilm and are also hidden behind heavy metals such as mercury and lead. There has been a study posted here before showing that eradication of specific pathogens with antibiotics is not possible unless proper chelation is done. That the specific pathogen regrows and dominates again if chelation of mercury and lead is not done. But once the chelation is done, antibiotics are able to inhibit the pathogens enough where they do not return "long term."

Probably the easiest way to find which pathogens are associated with androgenic alopecia from an independent researchers point of view is to use a F-Scan. Unfortanately they do cost $3,500 but they've been used for many other ailments to help tell which frequencies and possibly which pathogens are associated with different ailments. It will also say which heavy metals also found through resonance. Like the tricorder on Star Trek. That use of the device has been shown to work well for many ailments that are pathogen involved. It's a legit device and if I'm not mistaken Switzerland has spent many millions in their own research with the device.

The F-Scan is used by Dr. Sutherland and most likely used and with other methods to find that specific pathogen connected with hair loss.

This and much more interesting info has been posted in the past on this forum. Most of it about 1 - 2 years ago.

I'm rusty on this one as it's been about two years but from memory it goes something like it's known when the body is no longer able to control an infection and thus inflammation is a constant presence, the body turns toward calcification as a final effort to try to limit the pathogen from spreading. Prague has commented years ago and if I'm not mistaken goes something like all treatments that work for hair loss also work via preventing calcification... including inhibiting DHT.

There was a study that I had to pay for a couple years ago titled Calcification of the Ivory Dome. In it, it found through autopsies that those with hair loss had increased calcification at the scalp and thus blood flow was reduced as an effect. The worse the hair loss the worse the calcification and thus less blood flow.

The conclusion appeared to suggest that blood flow as an effect of what was going on. That calcification is what was causing the reduced blood flow. That appears to suggest without getting a handle on calcification and finding the cause of the calcification that blood flow will continue to be reduced.

I believe that "Calcification of the Ivory Dome" is caused by "specific" pathogens. Just as there are specific pathogens found in heart disease. Just as there as specific pathogens associated with cancer. Just as there are specific pathogens associated with Parkinson's, etc.. This would also include mold.

There is pleomorphism which means how pathogens are able to shape shift so would want to get a good handle on the terrain to help prevent other ailments. CS talks about thyroid and that's important as the thyroid is greatly important for keeping the cells voltage up to prevent toxins and heavy metals from accumulating and from a good portion of pathogens from taking hold as well as other benefits of course.

hope this helps

Brilliant post.

Mastery Sat Jul 28, 2012 3:19 pm

Environmental toxicity is critical to hair loss.

Circulation helps but is not the root cause. It help exposes the underlying weaknesses.

As CS, jdp, Prague and A>R have all said and proven you have got to nail the root causes...

M

LawOfThelema Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:17 pm

For example, regarding hair loss, there have been studies done showing specific pathogens associated with androgenic areata which have been posted on this site.

With androgenetic alopecia the only pathogenic connection I am aware of is comorbitity with dandruff and seborrhic dermatitis. The inflammation produced by the malazzesa yeast in those conditions can exasperate the hair loss. Of course the two conditions aren't always present.

I do think that greater pathogenic connections have been found in other forms of alopecia, but admittedly I don't focus too much on the literature of the other forms of hair loss.

Sponsored content