has this ever been tried

[crafter]

out of curiosity has a hair from the dht prone top of the scalp ever been removed and transplanted somewhere else, say back of the head or even or even say on an arm?

It would be interesting to see how it reacts, if the dht still gets to it.

[greatjob!]

It wouldn't change anything, it would still be susceptible to androgens. The hair removed always retains its original properties, that's why hair taken from the "safe zone" doesn't transform and become susceptible to androgens when it's implanted onto the top of the head.

[Dr. Glenn Charles]

Doesn't seem to make much sense. Not sure what the purpose would be.

[James7]

out of curiosity has a hair from the dht prone top of the scalp ever been removed and transplanted somewhere else, say back of the head or even or even say on an arm?

It would be interesting to see how it reacts, if the dht still gets to it.

I think this is a good question.

It may be that the skin environment at the 'donor area' is a also a factor.

The idea that follicles are either just 'DHT resistent' or 'non-DHT resistent', I think is rather over simplistic.

Of course, moving donor area hair does work.
But there are also products and clinical studies that prove you can grow hair in the affected regions, without the use of anti-androgens.

Moving healthy hair from the 'non-donor area' to the 'donor area' and analyzing those results, might give us some helpful clues to answering the puzzle of hairloss.

[greatjob!]

I think this is a good question.

It may be that the skin environment at the 'donor area' is a also a factor.

The idea that follicles are either just 'DHT resistent' or 'non-DHT resistent', I think is rather over simplistic.

Of course, moving donor area hair does work.
But there are also products and clinical studies that prove you can grow hair in the affected regions, without the use of anti-androgens.

Moving healthy hair from the 'non-donor area' to the 'donor area' and analyzing those results, might give us some helpful clues to answering the puzzle of hairloss.

Most of this is untrue. The follicles don't transform because you move them from one place to another. Sure you can grow androgen sensitive hair anywhere and it doesn't immediately fall out, but it will eventually fall out if it is programed to. You may think the idea of DHT resistant or non-DHT resistant is over simplistic, but it doesn't make it less true. The follicles in balding areas have higher numbers of androgen receptors than non balding areas. Here's a study for you :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9496234

The "environment" you place the follicles in means nothing, the follicles are the same regardless of where you move them.

[James7]

Most of this is untrue. The follicles don't transform because you move them from one place to another. Sure you can grow androgen sensitive hair anywhere and it doesn't immediately fall out, but it will eventually fall out if it is programed to. You may think the idea of DHT resistant or non-DHT resistant is over simplistic, but it doesn't make it less true. The follicles in balding areas have higher numbers of androgen receptors than non balding areas. Here's a study for you :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9496234

The "environment" you place the follicles in means nothing, the follicles are the same regardless of where you move them.

I'm aware of the theory already. More androgen receptors.

I didn't say that the follicles transformed, I think you misunderstood me.
Never said DHT didn't effect them either, obviously that is true. (we all know propecia helps to halt further progression)

Minoxidil, Bimatoprost, Histogens HSC - these all grow hair.
They all can grow hair without the use of anti-androgens.

So 'balding scalp hair' can grow, inspite of having the same DHT and hair with more androgen receptors.

Therefore the categorization often used is over simplistic.
There are other factors at play. These shouldn't be ignored, they play a part in our future treatments.

Sticking to over-simplifications can mean you don't care to find the underlying mechanisms at work. It's fine for explaining quickly to someone how propecia works, but less useful when looking for/discussing new angles of treatment.

It would be interesting to see how it reacts, if the dht still gets to it.

By saying 'skin enviornment', I was simply expanding on what crafter might have been getting at?
Maybe this has already been examined, that would be interesting.

I was just curious to know, like crafter, if such a study already existed. That's all

[mpb47]

Minoxidil, Bimatoprost, Histogens HSC - these all grow hair.
They all can grow hair without the use of anti-androgens.

So 'balding scalp hair' can grow, inspite of having the same DHT and hair with more androgen receptors.

Minox supposedly works by extending the growing stage of hair. And it has worked well for me, but like many say it doesn't address the underlying issue and you will still bald over time as I found out. Not sure about any of the others. Hopefully they or something down the line can completely stop it.

By saying 'skin enviornment', I was simply expanding on what crafter might have been getting at?
Maybe this has already been examined, that would be interesting.

I was just curious to know, like crafter, if such a study already existed. That's all

I don't know if it was an actual study but I did read a journal article years ago that stated if you for example transplanted vertex scalp somewhere else, mpb would still occur in the transplanted location. But I don't think it's that simple and will explain more below.


Let me state right now I do not understand mpb nearly as much as some of you guys as biology is a weak spot for me. But I have read plenty of articles because I have access to them at work.
With that said:

I personally believe that androgen receptors are certainly part of the problem but maybe not all of it.

1) I have read articles trying to explain why women don't go bald, or at least not nearly as often as men and whey they do, they don't get completely bald like we do. Both women and men have androgen receptors but men have a lot more of them. I think it depends on the area of the scalp but the hairline I think has the biggest difference. On top of that, women have a lot more aromatase receptors than we do and they convert T to E. So we get more DHT and they get more E which keeps their hair growing. But I still think this is may explain only part of the problem of mpb.

2) We have androgen receptors on our face and from what I have read DHT more than T is what triggers men to get beards at puberty. Since we have androgen receptors and DHT , you'd think, if anything, it would suppress facial hair growth, not cause it.

So there has to something else going on as well. I certainly have no idea what that is but it has to be something more than just DHT.