Transplanted hair receding years after HT.

[VictimOfDHT]

The lack of knowledge in here is overwhelming. First, it's admirable that you're all on here in hopes of gaining knowledge -- But let's get a few things straight.


The gene causing MPB is from your mother (the X chromosome) 100% of the time; so don't blame your lock-lost father.

Secondly, HT (from a good doc) is meant for men with their alopecia under control. Regardless of the "DHT resistant" strands of hair, if your body is still producing the DHT, it will choke out the relocated hair.

It is said to not even bother undergoing these treatments unless you are on a *working* DHT inhibitor, or until after ~40 (when ~90% of men are finished with their MPB).

Until then, you will most often find that within a few months the hair is falling out, regardless of what your money-eyed physician told you.

You're wrong. The transplanted hair does NOT fall out within a few months and NO, being under 40 does NOT mean your transplanted hair will fall out. I had an HT in 2003 and was satisfied with the results with no thinning until 2009 when within two months there was noticeable thinning especially in the right temple. So, for six years I had thick hair in the front and no, I wasn't 40. Most people who get HTs don't lose their transplanted hair.

Secondly, whether under 40 or over 40, what does that have to do with the production of DHT? DHT is in the body 40 or under or over. If the DHT is the reason why transplanted hairs fall out, they WILL fall out regardless of what age the person is and ALL people who get HTs WILL lose their transplants, however, that's not the case.

"alopecia under control...". What does that mean ? How can alopecia be under control ? I do take Fin and have been taking it for over a decade, yet I have the problem of losing my transplanted hairs after a random number of years.

You'll be surprised how many GPs don't actually know shit about HTs.

Like I said, I do believe I'm losing my transplanted hairs for some unknown reason that has nothing to do with DHT. DHT doesn't cause the hair to fall out all of a sudden and within a couple of months.

And no, the mother isn't 100% responsible for passing down the baldness gene. Both the father and the mother can pass it down, but if the mother has no bald men in her family while the father is bald, it doesn't take a genius to figure out who's responsible for the baldness in their children.

[itzbryan]

You're wrong. The transplanted hair does NOT fall out within a few months and NO, being under 40 does NOT mean your transplanted hair will fall out. I had an HT in 2003 and was satisfied with the results with no thinning until 2009 when within two months there was noticeable thinning especially in the right temple. So, for six years I had thick hair in the front and no, I wasn't 40. Most people who get HTs don't lose their transplanted hair.

Secondly, whether under 40 or over 40, what does that have to do with the production of DHT? DHT is in the body 40 or under or over. If the DHT is the reason why transplanted hairs fall out, they WILL fall out regardless of what age the person is and ALL people who get HTs WILL lose their transplants, however, that's not the case.

"alopecia under control...". What does that mean ? How can alopecia be under control ? I do take Fin and have been taking it for over a decade, yet I have the problem of losing my transplanted hairs after a random number of years.

You'll be surprised how many GPs don't actually know shit about HTs.

Like I said, I do believe I'm losing my transplanted hairs for some unknown reason that has nothing to do with DHT. DHT doesn't cause the hair to fall out all of a sudden and within a couple of months.

And no, the mother isn't 100% responsible for passing down the baldness gene. Both the father and the mother can pass it down, but if the mother has no bald men in her family while the father is bald, it doesn't take a genius to figure out who's responsible for the baldness in their children.

Wow. You took just about everything out of context.

First things first. I am a biology major. The gene for MPB is on the sex chromosome X. Which, if you are a male, comes from your MOTHER. NEVER your father.

There is a little thing called expressivity, which is the amount a gene expresses itself in an individual. Most often, it is very hard to see a woman with the trait because it does not effect women as bad (on average).

Also, women are XX while men are XY. If women possess the trait, they can have a DOMINANT ALLELE on the other X chromosome that MASKS the expressivity of the MPB gene, while still being able to pass that trait down to her offspring.

Secondly, "alopecia under control" refers to the MPB gene taking full effect (due to age) or the successful use of a DHT inhibitor.

So, you're telling me that my father, age 62, who hasn't lost any hair since his 30's, isn't finished with his MPB process?

[gillenator]

My word, after all of the time and thought it took to write my initial reply in this thread, I would have thought to at least received a modest thank you.

Guys, the condition for MPB can be passed by either side maternal or paternal. I am rather convinced of this after making observations in people for three decades.

Far more women suffer from MPB than you might think. They just know how to mask the thinning with hair length and styling. Far more women wear hair systems than you might think.

FDR, thanks for your comments. I prefere to call it donor zone thinning because it can happen in other donor areas other than the occipital zone. You make some valid points. Let me also invite you to consider hair caliber in this phenomenon of donor zone thinning. Younger patients can get by with lower density goals as measured by FU cm2 mainly due to the fact that their grade of hair caliber (degree of coarseness) is usually much higher on people under 40 years of age.

IMHO, the type of hairloss that slo and Victim are describing are more related to those transplanted hair follicles going dormant more permanently. It is not exactly the same as alopecia areata but similiar in cyclical behavior. With alopecia areata, there are blotches of total loss, not necessarily receding or thinning by hair count. Visual thinning can be seen or comfirmed by loss of density (hair count) or loss of caliber (diffusion). It does not sound like slo or Victim are "losing caliber" to their transplants; it sounds like they lost hair density. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding either patient. In most donor zone thinning cases, patients are in fact losing both hair count and caliber, however it is loss of hair count that most notice in the beginning stages of donor zone thinning.

If I am correct, than how can it hurt to have several biobsies done to at least confirm that the transplanted follicles exist, but just are not in hair production, the anagen phase? In other words, in both cases, these men initially experienced cyclical growth in their transplants right? That means that their transplanted follicles did take, they did produce, but later shut down. If either of you do have biopsies done, be sure that a comparison is made to hair follicles extracted from a terminal hair zone. Why? Because you also want to know if your transplanted follicles have miniturized "after" they were relocated to the recipient area.

If the transplanted follicles have not miniturized, then possibly efforts to stimulate those follicles into their respective growth phases is the answer. Who knows? That's where doctors need to investigate to see if there are viable efforts once they know the follicles are still intact, but just are not producing. That is what I want to convey to patients like slo and Victim. IMHO, they should not look to additional HTs. Thankfully they both appear to know that.

It is true that many GPs/internal medicine physicians have very limited knowledge of hair loss much less surgical hair restoration. There are unending phisiological processes and genetic implications behind hair growth as well as varying forms of alopecia (hairloss). Far too complex for us lay people.

Some choose to take a purely scientific path in their evaluations however I have observed many of them absolutely stumped by their own conclusions, by all of the stupifying examples that tell something all entirely different. I have chosen to base my opinions on true life examples of what indiviuals experience "across the board". There are almost always "pools" of individuals who have similiar experiences regardless of race. Age however is an entirely different factor and can have a huge implication in areas like donor zone thinning.

I also agree that all HT doctors should disclose this phenomenon as a low occuring risk and it should be taken into consideration "IN ITS PROPER CONTEXT". I also afore-mentioned a consideration that all potential HT patients should look at histories of obvious donor zone thinning within their respective families, both maternal and paternal sides!