This is post from QAM1 in alt.baldspot a few years later (btw good information in these years), Could anyone of ours give us more light ?
Best Regards
Armando
---------------------------------------------
There are many problems with the DHT theory for MPB. One the biggest is the
typical pattern of hair loss. If DHT was the major factor in hairloss there
would be random diffuse loss not a common pattern. It has been suggested that
the reason for this is because balding areas have more Androgen receptors than
non-balding areas. This still doesn't explain the pattern. The number of ARs
would matter only if DHT was made all at once at one time and then quickly
disappeared. But this doesn't happen because the amount of DHT is relatively
consistent in amount and over time.
I have been trying to think of a good analogy to explain this and this is the
best I can come up but you should get the point.
Picture an apartment during summer with a window open. And over time ten
mosquitoes fly in. If there is one person in the apartment he will get 10
mosquito bites. If there are two people they will get an average of 5 bites
each and so on. There would always be 10 mosquito bites no matter how many
people are in the apartment.
In this analogy the apartment is the cell, the mosquito is the DHT, the
person(s) is the Androgen receptor(s) and the mosquito bite is the effect of a
DHT combining with the Androgen receptor.
The point being is there would be no difference if a large number of androgen
receptors EACH were to combine with few DHT molecules or if a smaller number of
Androgen receptors EACH were to combine with a larger number of DHT molecues.
The effect would be the same.
So again because of the typical pattern formed in MPB (and other things), DHT
can not be a major factor in hairloss.
Pattern Hair Loss and DHT's Theory
Moderator: moderators
-
- Regular Poster
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 11:53 pm
- Hair Loss Type: Androgenetic Alopecia (Male Pattern Baldness)
- Have you had a hair transplant?: No
DHT, is it the cause of common baldness?
Dear friends,
Without any intention of arising polemic, in my opinion, the theory of DHT about common baldness does not explain all the observed facts. A main reason is that with the development of the antiandrogenic drugs the problem would have been solved, but shamefully that has not been so.
Scientific investigation, nowadays is walking in other areas. For example, see: http://jcs.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/114/19/3419
Best Regards
Armando
P.S.
This is the original text from our friend QAM1:
There are many problems with the DHT theory for MPB. One the biggest is the
typical pattern of hair loss. If DHT was the major factor in hairloss there
would be random diffuse loss not a common pattern. It has been suggested that
the reason for this is because balding areas have more Androgen receptors than
non-balding areas. This still doesn't explain the pattern. The number of ARs
would matter only if DHT was made all at once at one time and then quickly
disappeared. But this doesn't happen because the amount of DHT is relatively
consistent in amount and over time.
I have been trying to think of a good analogy to explain this and this is the
best I can come up but you should get the point.
Picture an apartment during summer with a window open. And over time ten
mosquitoes fly in. If there is one person in the apartment he will get 10
mosquito bites. If there are two people they will get an average of 5 bites
each and so on. There would always be 10 mosquito bites no matter how many
people are in the apartment.
In this analogy the apartment is the cell, the mosquito is the DHT, the
person(s) is the Androgen receptor(s) and the mosquito bite is the effect of a
DHT combining with the Androgen receptor.
The point being is there would be no difference if a large number of androgen
receptors EACH were to combine with few DHT molecules or if a smaller number of
Androgen receptors EACH were to combine with a larger number of DHT molecues.
The effect would be the same.
So again because of the typical pattern formed in MPB (and other things), DHT
can not be a major factor in hairloss.
Without any intention of arising polemic, in my opinion, the theory of DHT about common baldness does not explain all the observed facts. A main reason is that with the development of the antiandrogenic drugs the problem would have been solved, but shamefully that has not been so.
Scientific investigation, nowadays is walking in other areas. For example, see: http://jcs.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/114/19/3419
Best Regards
Armando
P.S.
This is the original text from our friend QAM1:
There are many problems with the DHT theory for MPB. One the biggest is the
typical pattern of hair loss. If DHT was the major factor in hairloss there
would be random diffuse loss not a common pattern. It has been suggested that
the reason for this is because balding areas have more Androgen receptors than
non-balding areas. This still doesn't explain the pattern. The number of ARs
would matter only if DHT was made all at once at one time and then quickly
disappeared. But this doesn't happen because the amount of DHT is relatively
consistent in amount and over time.
I have been trying to think of a good analogy to explain this and this is the
best I can come up but you should get the point.
Picture an apartment during summer with a window open. And over time ten
mosquitoes fly in. If there is one person in the apartment he will get 10
mosquito bites. If there are two people they will get an average of 5 bites
each and so on. There would always be 10 mosquito bites no matter how many
people are in the apartment.
In this analogy the apartment is the cell, the mosquito is the DHT, the
person(s) is the Androgen receptor(s) and the mosquito bite is the effect of a
DHT combining with the Androgen receptor.
The point being is there would be no difference if a large number of androgen
receptors EACH were to combine with few DHT molecules or if a smaller number of
Androgen receptors EACH were to combine with a larger number of DHT molecues.
The effect would be the same.
So again because of the typical pattern formed in MPB (and other things), DHT
can not be a major factor in hairloss.
no offense armando but something doesn't quite sound right about your theories. I think dht triggers the whole process in people that have hair loss in the genes because when people get castreated they dont lose hair anymore. maybe other things are happening at the same time because dht makes the hair weaker but that still doesnt mean dht isnt the main deal. just my opinion anyways, I'm no doctor or expert
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests