gmonasco

This topic is already covered on this board here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/159574-researchers-accidently-reverse-baldness-alopecia-mice.html

One of the complicating factors in hair transplantation is that hair loss is progressive, and thus HTs should be undertaken with long-range plans (something akin to worst-case scenarios) in place to plan for future hair loss. I think this is one of the more difficult aspects for potential HT patients to be aware of and consider, because most of the pictures we see of HT patients are taken within a year or two of their surgeries. Yes, the pictures look good because they addressed the extant hair loss at the time of the surgery, but what happened down the line? I think it would be helpful if we could get some veterans who are several years out from their transplants to post some recent pictures to provide an idea of how well (or perhaps not) HTs can hold up over time.

It's a whole lot worse losing your hair than actually being bald, writes Eddie Botha. http://www.timeslive.co.za/lifestyle/article925544.ece/No-brushing-aside-inevitable

It's not a "new study" -- the article is from March 2000. Here's an even older article about it, from 1999: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/transplant-of-hair-cells-offers-hope-for-the-bald-738710.html

I was 18 when a hairdresser casually mentioned that I was 'thinning on top', and eight years later its all gone. But I'm fine with it, and here's why you should be too... http://www.sabotagetimes.com/life/the-8-reasons-why-being-bald-is-brilliant/

I don't think so. Vanity is being "excessively proud of or concerned about one's own appearance." Men who seek HTs are not, for the most part, trying to improve upon what they had originally or make themselves look better than they did before -- they're simply trying to regain a little bit of what they once had so they can have a modicum of comfort in the face they present to the world. I don't see that as being any more "vain" than people who seek facial reconstructive surgery after being disfigured in accidents.

Male hair loss is a common concern. Now there are new reasons for hope and acting early is crucial. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/wellbeing/8331722/Forget-comb-overs-help-is-at-hand.html

Boots now offers prescription medicine for hair retention without a trip to the GP. (Note inserted by administrator - This link appears strictly promotional. It's simply an article about a website that offers prescription medication without a prescription. Nothing ground breaking or innovative is being discussed here...just a promotion for a website. Thus, this link has been removed)

For the first time in six years Philip Milton has had to have a haircut. It's not something that would normally merit a mention but it's significant in his case because it means he has overcome alopecia. http://www.thisisnorthdevon.co.uk/news/bottle-d-multi-billionaire/article-3227834-detail/article.html

Horseradish and pigeon droppings. That's the magic hair-growth potion prescribed by Hippocrates. Alas, there are so many myths about hair loss that folks today are almost as clueless as the father of medicine. Keep reading as hair loss expert Dr. Robert Bernstein, clinical professor of dermatology at Columbia University, explodes 10 all-too-common follicle fallacies. http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-10006727.html

I was reading the Wikipedia article on androgenic alopecia (i.e., male pattern baldness), and it contains the following passage about the causes of MPB: I don't understand what the second paragraph is trying to say. Can anyone explain it in simpler terms?

This topic is already covered on the board here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/159574-researchers-accidently-reverse-baldness-alopecia-mice.html

This topic is already covered here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/159574-researchers-accidently-reverse-baldness-alopecia-mice.html

I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but I'm kind of puzzled. You initially wrote "I said I hoped to be back at work in 14 days" but then you were "sent all the pre and post-op instructions stating I couldn't even touch the recipient area for 14 days, at which time scabs could begin to be gently removed." Does that not fit your timeline? -- at the end of the 14th day, you remove the scabs and go back to work. Or is the issue that you can't remove all the scabs at once, so you'd still have some scabbing after the 14th day?

This topic is already covered here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/159574-researchers-accidently-reverse-baldness-alopecia-mice.html

That statement is meaningless, because one could just as well claim that only "insecure" men (of any background) would care enough about their looks to want a hair transplant in the first place.

Good news for bald mice: A five-day treatment can restore a silky black coat of fur. But it will be a while before the hair-raising drug -- accidently discovered by University of California, Los Angeles scientists studying gut function -- is ready to be tested in humans. http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/baldness-alopecia-reversed-mice/story?id=12932070

Unfortunately, that's not the case. Plenty of wealthy men still buy into Rogaine, Propecia, hairpieces, hair transplants, etc.

Men who go bald in their early 20s have a doubled risk of developing prostate cancer, but those who lose hair in their 30s and 40s apparently are not at greater risk, French researchers have reported. The findings suggest that men who lose their hair very early in life might benefit from increased screening. http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-bald-prostate-02162011,0,4374932.story

No, I just live on the Internet.

Yes, I'm amused when I hear people say that they can "always spot a hair transplant." Obviously, if they had ever encountered hair transplants that they didn't recognize as such, they'd never know it. The very first HT consultation I ever went for was with Hasson & Wong, where of course I met Joetronic. I was fairly new to these boards then, and although I had read some of Joetronic's posts and blog entries, I didn't realize he was the same "Joe" who worked for H&W. So, when Joe initially approached me in the reception area at H&W, one of my first thoughts was "Hey, he has a nice head of hair; I wish I still did." I was really, really surprised to learn that he was the same person as the "Joetronic" whom I'd seen photos of with little more hair on his head than a few old-style transplant plugs in the front. Sure, if I had been more knowledgeable about hair transplants at the time and had been examining him with a critical eye, maybe I would have spotted him as an HT. But as a lay person not expecting or looking for anything in particular in that regard, the thought didn't cross my mind.

Two weeks ago, Kayla Martell may have lost the Miss America title to 17-year-old Miss Texas, but she was the more memorable contender, applauded in the media for bravery in the face of baldness. “You can’t be defined and shouldn’t be defined by your hair,” she told reporters. But what about being defined by your lack of it? It was odd timing that Martell’s story emerged when another bald head was traveling the globe in the vivid photograph of accused Arizona shooter Jared Loughner. Loughner’s now infamous mug shot showed a faintly stubbly skull, capping a grinning, feverish expression. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/style/katrina-onstad/why-a-bald-head-is-never-neutral/article1883510/

I thought this article was a very good summary of the recent study which suggested a link between progenitor cells and hair loss: http://www.independent.com/news/2011/feb/12/hair-so-new/

Wow, thanks for the pointer! As I said, Dr. Alexander is another one of the several hair restoration surgeons I've seen in person, and I would never guess he had undergone a hair transplant: it seemed to me his hairline was rather high and sparse, and he had a noticeable bald spot on his crown. Perhaps my perception is off, but I didn't think his hair looked nearly as good in person as in the post-operative photos in that link -- maybe the pictures were very flattering, or perhaps he's experienced significant additional hair loss in the several years since those procedures were done.

Really? I've also seen Dr. Alexander in person, and he didn't look to me like someone who had undergone a hair transplant.