-
Originally Posted by WillhasWill
So follicles are the same? This is very different to Pate's point about androgen receptors in the follicles
If this is true and sebcaceous glands were a factor then transplants would not necessarily be immune from baldness.
Regardless of sebcaceous glands, this is the first time I have heard that they play a role, but has it been proven that hair transplants are immune from balding?
Pate, you mention the concept of donor dominance. Has this been proved? You mention that if hair follicles were the same follicles and baldness was caused by something different in the scalp, the transplanted follicles would undergo balding just the same. But they don't, which means they must be fundamentally different from the other follicles. But on it's own this would not prove hair follicles are different.
Baldness could still be caused by something different localised in specific areas on the scalp and simply takes years to destroy the follicle. Therefore a fresh follicle transplanted into the balding area would not be affected for many years. If a person underwent surgery at 40 years old and only went balding in the few years leading up to have the transplant, then it took many years for the hair follicles to be affected. So the new follicle may not be affected again for many years, but it is still susceptible. We just do not see it in the patients life time.
i should say however, all of the previous science states that follicles in the sides/back and the balding areas are different due to the sensitivity between the follicles...in my opinion the genetically determined androgen sensitivity between the areas applies true but not to the follicles but the sebcaceous glands.
so a hair transplanted from the donor region to the balding area will not be susceptible to balding because th sebcaceous glands androgen sensitivity is genetically, not high, so its likley thoose hairs will not be destroyed, ever.
here is some research that was done -
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2909628
-
Sorry if someone already mentioned this, but it seems relevant to the discussion:
From what I understand, hairs on the back and sides of the head aren't immune to the miniaturization process, just extremely resistant. There are some MPB sufferers who experience considerable thinning in the "horse shoe region" (not sure if it's just miniaturization or if it includes actual shedding).
-
Its entirely possible the donor hair is more or less exactly the same.
If it takes 30 years for regular hair to finally start falling/thinning...it stands to reason that if indeed something is 'different' about the scalp, it would take another 30 years to "break down" transplants.
Have they been doing high quality FUE and FUT for 30 years? Hell no, barely 10 maybe 15. So if you've got some 25 or 30 year old who got it done in 2000...lets revisit them in 15-20 years and see if that transplant hair is still around.
Just recenly they did show that the scalp areas that lose hair have a higher PDG2 level. Why? Is it a byproduct of balding or part of the reason? If its part of the reason, it stands that any other hair should fall victim eventually.
Similar Threads
-
By Artista in forum Introduce Yourself & Share Your Story
Replies: 21
Last Post: 02-20-2012, 11:46 AM
-
By clandestine in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 7
Last Post: 09-06-2011, 04:39 AM
-
By clee984 in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 4
Last Post: 08-25-2010, 11:31 PM
-
By gmonasco in forum Hair Loss Treatments
Replies: 1
Last Post: 05-20-2010, 10:57 AM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks