Studies that help confirm my theory that balding = low oxygen + DHT

I'm a bit hung over today, so I'm having a hard time grasping all of that.

From what I gather, , the presence or absence of igf-1 and the persence or absence of shbg are FACTORS involved in MBP, just like (IMO) thyroid function, overall blood circulation, microcirculation, scalp tightness, head shape etc.

I think all of these factors are involved in MPB, but I think ultimately why we bald in the galea region, and not anywhere else, is due to the environment. The most logical assumption IMO, then, is since it is the highest point in the body, it is prone to its' blood supply being choked off, and the studies suggesting that loosening the scalp reverses hairloss, that the poor blood circulation is the root cause.

We may thin in other areas, due to thyroid function, hormonal imbalances etc etc, but IMO if the scalp circulation was brought up to the level of the hair on the sides of our heads, that we would have the same amount of hairloss as the sided of our head do.

Immune system ..so our body is attacking and resulting hair loss.

One thing that really irritates me, ive mentioned it before.
Most men i see over 50 with full heads of hair have little body hair... This is purely anecdotal. The men who age hairy arms, face and chest hair more often than not are either bald slick or thin at front and back. Does anyone agree/disagree with me and why?

Live forever wrote:Immune system ..so our body is attacking and resulting hair loss.

But why attack only the galea area?

SlowMoe wrote:

Live forever wrote:Immune system ..so our body is attacking and resulting hair loss.

But why attack only the galea area?

*Perhaps* the constricted capillaries = poor circulation = poor lymph drainage = increased toxicity = heightened immune response.

This isn't the case for me personally, though, as I don't feel inflammation as much as the tight galea crew on here. But I could see how a tight galea could cause such problems.

Slowmoe,

Yeah, the pattern is interesting, without a doubt. I mean, I was completely amazed by that study CS posted. We have a programmed migration of mast cells to the MPB region. What is it that is causing the attraction? This would require more information on what causes the movement of immature mast cells in the body. What I'd really like to know would be when this movement begins in the male lifetime. If a person has premature balding, at what age do we begin to see the redistribution of the mast cells? I'd imagine it begins at/around puberty, but this would literally require being able to predict MPB ahead of the fact and biopsy the scalp skin of an individual intermittently. I'm sure the technology is there to do this now, but will it get done, who knows.

LiveForever,

You are absolutely right about your observation. Even within my own family, I balded prematurely. Both of my brothers who are a year younger have irritatingly thick heads of hair. They have virtually zero body hair while I have quite a bit of it.

This is a real hormonal profile typical of MPB. Lower total testosterone, a higher than average free fraction of testosterone, higher DHT, and lower SHBG. I have a pretty easy time spotting this anymore. But yeah this is a real thing. Now obviously all hairloss can't be attributed to this profile either. I've seen guys with thyroid related hair loss that didn't have any of these symptoms. One thing I've noticed also is a tendency for the former guys (low SHBG, high DHT) to have an easier time accumulating fat in the mid-section also. And it tends to be that hard visceral fat that sits underneath the abdominal wall. Again, not every guy is gonna follow that rule though.

Xenon,

That is a possibility. Poor lymph flow is an immune stimulant for sure. It could also be some microorganism. It could also be bad fat metabolism. Or a combination.

It's true sloe, the why only the galea area is something that can't be ignored.
So in short you are saying it is the tightness of the muscles that is causing the body to react negatively to a hormone...
From an accumulation of this hormone?
and then the body is attacking this. > pgd2 etc will be seen.

My chin is hairy, yet it is so soft and fatty.

I would love to create a tight environment on my chin and see if hair loss would occur

AS... would you say that it is possible to increase shbg and testosterone naturally ... And in doing so would you expect to see a mans body hair reduce in doing so (saying this man in question had low shbg and test to begin with)

I considered that Slowmoe's information on hypoxic conditions in the scalp might be the mast cell recruiting factor, describing the accumulation of mast cell's CS posted about recently (the producers of PGD2).

Well, get a load of this:

http://thorax.bmj.com/content/31/1/94.full.pdf

Brayand vanArsdel, 1961). Haas and Bergofsky (1972) have shown that suspensions of rat peritoneal mast cells discharge histamine when hypoxic gases are bubbled through them. In view of the relationship between mast cells, histamine, and pulmonary vasoconstriction, it is possible that mast cells may play a functional role in the pulmonary arteriolar and right ventricular hypertrophy (RVH) which develop during chronic hypoxia.

Increased levels of histamine have been found in the pulmonary venous blood from hypoxic lungs...

It probably acts by stabilizing the mast cell membrane regardless of the stimulus, and it is therefore possible that disodium cromoglycate might prevent hypoxic mast cell
degranulation.

http://www.fibrogenesis.com/content/3/1/17

...indicating that hypoxic areas within the tissue were associated with increased production of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species...

Taken together, we suggest that hypoxia-associated oxidative stress initiates mast cell proliferation and FGF secretion, spurring fibroblast proliferation and tissue fibrosis. Fibroblasts within this hypoxic environment undergo metaplastic transformation to fibrocartilage, followed by heterotopic ossification, resulting in increased joint stiffness. Thus, hypoxia and associated oxidative stress are potential therapeutic targets for fibrosis and metaplastic progression of idiopathic arthrofibrosis after TKA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17762205

The cromolyn treatment inhibited MC migration into the CNS (p < 0.05) and limited brain damage more than 50% (p < 0.01) vs. saline controls. These data support the hypothesis that MCs are key contributors to the extent of brain damage due to hypoxia-ischemia in the immature animal.


Whoa.

Live Forever,

SHBG is difficult to control. The relationship between sex hormone levels and SHBG is genetic and multi-factorial. About the only natural ways I know of optimizing SHBG levels are to optimize thyroid function (even subclinical) and liver function.

Cheers as. Yeah - back to thyroid, liver , insulin etc etc. not the easy path...but a very important one long term.

Cromolyn, histamine pgd2 etc etc as far as I can see all point to allergies. Would it be possible to say mpb is like an allergy?
The itching I hear reported a lot and suffered by myself... Does this link in here?

IGF is secreted locally by the dermal papilla when it is in anagen mode. Blood serum levels of IGF have no impact on the hair follicle itself. They do have a strong interaction with androgen's though. I would go as far to say that it raises your testosterone. That's why some people get excessive sebum production when they drink dairy products.

Brayand vanArsdel, 1961). Haas and Bergofsky (1972) have shown that suspensions of rat peritoneal mast cells discharge histamine when hypoxic gases are bubbled through them. In view of the relationship between mast cells, histamine, and pulmonary vasoconstriction, it is possible that mast cells may play a functional role in the pulmonary arteriolar and right ventricular hypertrophy (RVH) which develop during chronic hypoxia.

I always feel inflammation exclusively to the galea if exposed to high levels of C02. This normally occurs if I'm in a very poorly ventilated room where lots of people are constantly exhaling C02, not to mention C02 emissions from heating appliances. This is why I always try to keep my bedroom as ventilated as possible because a) sleeping long hours in a poorly ventilated room will cause a build up of C02 in my bloodstream b) pillow compression further reduces oxygen delivery to cells.

Seriously, if you put a heating appliance in a room with inadequate ventilation, watch your scalp inflame like no one's business.

ETA: "Non-flued heaters – also known as unvented heaters, ventfree heaters or flueless fires may be either permanently installed or portable, and sometimes incorporate a catalytic converter.[1] Non-flued heaters can be risky if appropriate safety procedures are not followed. There must be adequate ventilation – which is a problem due to the ventilation cooling the house, counteracting the heating – they must be kept clean, and they should always be switched off before sleeping. If operating correctly the main emissions of a non-flued gas heater are water vapour and carbon dioxide. If there is incomplete combustion, toxic products such as carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide form. If ventilation is poor, the carbon dioxide level in a room will begin to increase, and prevent the release of carbon dioxide from the blood to the room air (see lung) far before the decrease of available oxygen (or carbon monoxide forming) becomes a problem."

So far the only way I've read to raise SHBG is to improve thyroid function, so that includes using iodine etc.

I'm sure there must be some other ways though, naturally of course.

Also, the body hair observation is interesting too, whenever I think of people that fit that profile (dense body hair/balding) it's that they have dense hair all over such as their upper arms, chest even shoulders or back, however one of my friends is balding who only really has thickish/dense body hair on their chest, their arms and legs have really fine/light hair.  Could it be that chest hair is a sign of that profile?

I suppose i do know a few preamturely bald men with little body hair.
You would think say if there was no problem in the scalp, that high dht would equal more hair... But this is the paradox.

CS has said before that body hair is a good thing and doesnt correlate to hair loss. its weird as you would think it does.

Live forever wrote:

CS has said before that body hair is a good thing and doesnt correlate to hair loss. its weird as you would think it does.

Yeah, it's taken me a while to get that notion out of my head, since when first starting this hair loss journey and having been on other hair loss sites you're told body hair means dht, so lots of body hair=high dht which is bad for hair thus the connection between body hair/hair loss.

theseeker86 wrote:

Live forever wrote:

CS has said before that body hair is a good thing and doesnt correlate to hair loss. its weird as you would think it does.

Yeah, it's taken me a while to get that notion out of my head, since when first starting this hair loss journey and having been on other hair loss sites you're told body hair means dht, so lots of body hair=high dht which is bad for hair thus the connection between body hair/hair loss.

Lol, if you have hairy legs but no body hair chest + arms, I would not expect any hair loss. The next thing I have noticed is the fact that many male models who smokes have a great hair. However not only male models.... even all the people (you know ...Robin Thicke, Nicoleas Ripoll, Arthur Gosse, Aston Kutcher, Robert Pattinson, Gerard-Butler, Joachim Low, Eric-Bana, Justin-Timberlake, Wenworth Miller, David Bowie + David Lynch = quite old, NW0, Brad Pitt, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Calvin Klein, Mesut Ozil... and so on ). Smokers have elevated body hair and usualy no sign of hair loss. Nonsmokers with elevated bodyhair are usualy bald. It is just my own observation...I think that smoking must be in some way healthy. Look at David Lynch, David Bowie - they are quite old and looks so healthy. Read this : http://peatarian.com/20824/the-black-lung-lie           . Whats your opinion on this link (the post under the question) ? Calvin Klein on the photo above has hairy chest and these days, he still has full head of hair : ).

For every non bald/balding smoker I could show you a bald/balding smoker.

Why are you so sure that it's smoking and just not that the fact that those people just don't have genes for hair loss?  That's kind why mpb is so annoying in the first place, there are people that can treat their bodies like shit/smoke that don't lose their hair.

Yes, I know there are balding smokers. But show me a photo of some old man with full head of hair (and he must be a nonsmoker). These people are so rare IMHO. You could say that most of old people are bald. I agree, it is true. However you could find that smokers are more prone to keep all their hair for whole life. I wonder what's your opinion on the link I have posted.

Yeah, without a doubt, smoking is not good for hair. The men like the one in the picture are the exception to the rule. Balding is multi-factorial. There isn't one thing you can point to and say, "Oh he doesn't have that, he won't lose hair." There are too many genes involved. Even the hypoxia information we've been talking about. I've known people with respiratory diseases and things like apnea, who still didn't lose hair.

I do believe body hair has a connection to androgenetic alopecia.

If you switch genders and look at hyperandrogenism in women, what are the symptoms:  alopecia, acne, hirsuitism.

The typical effect of androgen excess (not necessarily total serum T) is scalp loss and increased body hair.

For every guy like the one in the previous photo, you'll also find one like this:


Well, maybe not that bad. I certainly don't have that back hair. This guy is an ape, but overall I've got more hair on my chest and stomach than most guys. The majority of the guys I know with incredibly thick hair have less body hair than average. But again, I also know guys who break that rule too. So overall, it isn't this simple. But we can draw some connections and establish that there is an androgen paradox, why is DHT promoting hair growth in some tissue while stopping it in others? Maybe the hypoxic condition is the connector, but it also has to be tied to the immune resposne (as in the mast cell study) and to differences in androgen receptor sensitivity in that area too.

At the end of the day, our discussion of this will continue to go in circles around this paradox. It will probably be a while before science uncovers the entire picture of the genetic cross-talk going on in MPB. Its probably even more complicated than we think. The solution to MPB is going to come from something that addresses one specific signal: like PGD2, or perhaps more upstream of this by addressing tissue oxygenation, or by blocking an androgen receptor or androgen receptor-complex that is specific to the scalp. My point is, the solution to hair loss is probably going to lead in front of our total understanding of the whys by a quite a bit of time.

lamka wrote: But show me a photo of some old man with full head of hair (and he must be a nonsmoker). These people are so rare IMHO.

You can't be serious?  I'll just type into google "old man with full head of hair that isn't a smoker"

I know plenty of men that are middle to old age that don't smoke that have hair, I also know young guys around 20's-30's that smoke and have hair loss. Do I also know people that smoke that have full head of hair? yes, but I don't believe it's because of smoking.

You're free to believe what you want, but in this case your logic is flawed.

No, It is my own research. Sorry for this, every time I see some old man with full head of hair I ask him if does he smoke. The answer is yes. Yes, it is just Flaming. There are not any scientific research.

In this link http://peatarian.com/20824/the-black-lung-lie , there is written : "Smoking itself seems to show some anti-cancer properties. Nicotine is highly antimicrobial and has been proven to kill off even the gram-negative bacteria and viruses that are immune to regular antibiotics."

-Tobacco has both anti-estrogenic and anti-serotoninergic effects. On the other hand, it increases the levels of androgens and dopamine. That's one explanation for the many beneficial effects. It also decreases the levels of the "toxic" growth hormones.

-But it was already shown that smoking increases the levels of several antioxidants, so the problem should resolve itself.

Maybe I am not right about smoking and balding at all but smoking looks quite healthy. I really do not believe anti-smoking propaganda. Maybe CS remember this old member - Prague, here are his posts about smoking (Gitanes sans filtre )
https://immortalhair.forumotion.com/t1057p15-is-marijuana-and-or-hemp-bad-for-hair

lamka wrote:No, It is my own research. Sorry for this, every time I see some old man with full head of hair I ask him if does he smoke. The answer is yes. Yes, it is just Flaming. There are not any scientific research.

In this link http://peatarian.com/20824/the-black-lung-lie , there is written : "Smoking itself seems to show some anti-cancer properties. Nicotine is highly antimicrobial and has been proven to kill off even the gram-negative bacteria and viruses that are immune to regular antibiotics."

-Tobacco has both anti-estrogenic and anti-serotoninergic effects. On the other hand, it increases the levels of androgens and dopamine. That's one explanation for the many beneficial effects. It also decreases the levels of the "toxic" growth hormones.

-But it was already shown that smoking increases the levels of several antioxidants, so the problem should resolve itself.

Maybe I am not right about smoking and balding at all but smoking looks quite healthy. I really do not believe anti-smoking propaganda. Maybe CS remember this old member - Prague, here are his posts about smoking (Gitanes sans filtre )
https://immortalhair.forumotion.com/t1057p15-is-marijuana-and-or-hemp-bad-for-hair

lol of course smoking has SOME beneficial consequences, like training certain aspects of your body because it is put under constant pressure to compensate the damage it does, but the damage far outweights the benefits. it's like saying "i'll take the poison cause when my heart stops beating it prevents it from reaching my brain".

i've been a smoker from 16-24yo. the last year i smoked i only smoked about 1-2 cigarettes per week at work at lunchbreaks, during that time (smoking so rarely) i could exactly feel what it did to my body, having even only 1 cigarette  every few days. i found it took days, to finally have a 100% neutral taste in my mouth and the whites of my eyes to become as bright as they naturally were. +
not to mention fitness performance and overall feeling.

smoking IS damage, no anti-smoking propagandist speaking here, just plain common sense.

For me it is an extreme funny thread . After this series of photos had been uploaded I laughed so hard. Thanks you guys .

It depends what do you smoke. Organic tabaco or the one without any chemicals seems good to me. Also many times mentioned Gitanes without filter are good IMHO. I do not like this guy much but he talks about benefits of smoking + under the video there are interesting comments. It is worth reading. I have no hair loss(just dandruff), so I can not talk about effects of smoking to your body.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouTWt-80tdI

CS, would you post here your thoughts on smoking please ?

Lamka, you make a good point in that last one.

Smoking a purely dehydrated tobacco plant in an unbleached paper can't really be compared to smoking a pack of Marlboros. I've seen some arguments that the contents of the more popular cigarettes are actually cleaner than most people think, that the real problem is the filter itself. But I wonder what the tradeoff of using no filter would really be. Perhaps pipe smoking might be a better option for smokers, but I can't really say that for sure.

In either case, for any good that smoking might do, its doing a disproportionate amount of bad. I don't care if you were smoking the cleanest plant on earth. The chemical changes associated with combusting organic material, and then inhaling that into the lungs. There is no one out there that can argue this isn't bad for the lungs physiologically. There is too much evidence for damage to those organs. So if you show me an example of a chemical in a cigarette with physiological benefits, it doesn't really matter because there is always going to be a better vehicle for getting good things into the body than inhaling smoke.

There have been a lot of discussions here at the board bout the double-edged sword of biochemistry. In one instance (looking at a single pathway) a molecule can do something very beneficial, and in another context it can do something very bad. That's because the body doesn't really sort things out according to good or bad.

So whatever evidence we might show for nicotine having some benefits, the entire vehicle for administering it is tossing in a lot of unwanted chemicals. If you want some nicotine, go grab some nicotine gum/patches. But I'll warn you, anything that is neuroactive has the potential for a lot of adverse side effects. And I'm not only talking about the lifestyle changes associated with addiction. When you mess with neurotransmitter levels you mess with the entire organism. Processes which can lead to autoimmune situations and psychological problems. Ask any smoker what the psychological effects of nicotine are like. Depression, anger, and anxiety when you aren't constantly getting nicotine because of how it downregulates dopamine receptors in the brain. Aka, you take more stimulus just to get to the baseline level of happiness/contentedness you would normally be at having never used the drug.

I've read about many long term fin users who experience thinner body hair while simultaneously regrowing their head hair, so perhaps DHT causes an increase of growth factors in the majority of androgenic follicles, which then utilize limited stores of keratin.

I mean when you consider just how many androgenic hairs there are on a guy's body, and also take into account that the beard hair is in a longer anagen phase, then that must be a shitload of keratin being used to form hair. Part of the problem  may well be that there just isn't enough nutrients to supply the scalp.