Tweet
sounds good, but i'd like to see some actual stuff we could use.
-
sounds good, but i'd like to see some actual stuff we could use. -
I wonder if you can block dkk1 topically ? -
Why is there no interest in thisComment
-
this is very, very interesting. Another piece of the puzzle revealed.Comment
-
Very interesting stuff.
Clearly multiple ways that scientists are solving the problem, it just seems that clearly safety has to be tested as we are messing with our own bodies proteins and cells.
I'm really just interested in a bridge treatment right now, Fin/Min aren't strong enough for my agressive hairloss, they only slow it down, I need another anti-androgen like CB or even BIM to hurry up!!Comment
-
You can forget this. This is old news: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17657240
DHT -> DKK-1
I highly doubt it would be any better than a topical finasteride.Comment
-
I follow a lot of the press releases fairly closely, particularly those from Penn, and I missed this, or at least the potential significance of this. When it comes down to it, all of the stuff we talk about on here is for the most part very theoretical in its effects (for example, there's nothing that says as good as CB or Histogen-style treatments seem like they could be means that they won't encounter some unsolvable problem somewhere down the road), and as long as we're talking about something that's theoretical but seemingly plausibly effective, this is as good a candidate as I've seen.Comment
-
Doesn't work. They are exploring drugs (and doing clinical trials) which antagonize DKK1 to repress the WNT pathway, DKN-01 and BHQ 880. If it would work i bet they would see some side effect in hair increase.Comment
-
Swooping, I'm not sure I follow you. From what you say, it sounds like trials and experiments are underway. When you say it "doesn't work," do you mean you have a gut instinct that it won't work or do you mean that they've tried every likely way to do this and none of them have worked?
Also, if you could post any links or specifics on trials or experiments related to this, it would be greatly appreciated.Comment
-
For the anti-DKK1 drugs;
I am just saying that they are already experimenting with antagonizing DKK1. Thus if it was really that important to "cure" us , that would show as a side effects from those trials in terms of hair increase. It is also a way more complex cascade of events anyway. I could give you some examples but you would be bored i guess lol.Comment
-
Those abstracts talk about major diseases - cancer. The researchers who are studying these drugs may not be paying significant attention for hair growth. Also, even if the cancer researchers are watching for hair growth but aren't seeing it that doesn't mean that antagonizing DKK1 wouldn't be the final piece of the puzzle needed to get breakthrough hair growth results if you combined a DKK1 antagonist with say fat cell growth factors/proteins. Maybe DKK1 antagonism by itself is not sufficient to grow hair but maybe it's a necessary ingredient to get other growth factors and proteins to do the best job possible.For the anti-DKK1 drugs;
I am just saying that they are already experimenting with antagonizing DKK1. Thus if it was really that important to "cure" us , that would show as a side effects from those trials in terms of hair increase. It is also a way more complex cascade of events anyway. I could give you some examples but you would be bored i guess lol.Comment
-
Thanks for explaining, I see your point now. However, it still seems possible to me that you might need to target the treatments in a specific way to see MPB related effects. Or as the poster pointed out, as they were specifically looking for effects on cancer they may very well not have noticed (and certainly would not have been measuring) effects on scalp hair.For the anti-DKK1 drugs;
I am just saying that they are already experimenting with antagonizing DKK1. Thus if it was really that important to "cure" us , that would show as a side effects from those trials in terms of hair increase. It is also a way more complex cascade of events anyway. I could give you some examples but you would be bored i guess lol.
You are right that it is a complex cascade of events that leads to MPB. However there are two equally valid ways to approach this. One is if you can reverse engineer the whole naturally occurring process, then you might be able to intervene at some point to stop or reverse it. The other is the "happy accident" approach, in which you have a general understanding of how the MPB occurs at a chemical level and then you experiment with different things that seem as if they might be related and see what effects it has or you're using a drug for something else and you see that it has effects on MPB. Many, many drug discoveries happen from this latter process. There's nothing that says if you understand every element of how hair loss occurs that you will be able to stop or reverse it (even though it's a worthwhile approach and it really feels like this should work). Likewise, just because you don't understand why a drug does what it does, that doesn't mean it doesn't work. They don't really know why Latisse regrows eyebrow or eyelash hair, but they noticed that this was a side effect for other treatments, and since it didn't hurt patients to use it this way, it is now a commercially available product that more or less does what it says, all without them understanding why. Both approaches are good when it comes to hair loss (for example, as Garza stated, the biggest thing that clued them into the importance of PGD2 was the Latisse discovery). Let's just hope some damn thing eventually works out!Comment
-
More 10 years.Comment
Comment