Interesting video on transplant longevity and recipient site

[follically challenged]

I always wondered if follicle survival was just as simple as 'some hairs are less affected by DHT than others'. I always wondered if scalp tension, scalp location, played a more significant role, and that it wasn't just as easy as implanting hairs from the donor safe zone and away you go into the sunset. 

According to this video I just stumbled across, this seems to be the case; recipient site influence can overrule donor dominance. I.e. host tissue can affect even the hairs that are thought to be safe, reducing the density of transplants 4/5 years down the line.

In other words, certain areas of host tissue can perhaps secrete more / less negative factors (I guess DHT?) depending on where you implant them. Thus, recipient sites seem to play a big role, and i guess this is why so many patients need HT top-ups down the line.

The video seems to be backed up by studies. Worth watching from the 12 minute mark. Interested to see what you guys think. Cheers
 

[JDEE0]

1 minute ago, follically challenged said:

I always wondered if follicle survival was just as simple as 'some hairs are less affected by DHT than others'. I always wondered if scalp tension, scalp location, played a more significant role, and that it wasn't just as easy as implanting hairs from the donor safe zone and away you go into the sunset. 

According to this video I just stumbled across, this seems to be the case; recipient site influence can overrule donor dominance. I.e. host tissue can affect even the hairs that are thought to be safe, reducing the density of transplants 4/5 years down the line.

In other words, certain areas of host tissue can perhaps secrete more / less negative factors (I guess DHT?) depending on where you implant them. Thus, recipient sites seem to play a big role, and i guess this is why so many patients need HT top-ups down the line.

The video seems to be backed up by studies. Worth watching from the 12 minute mark. Interested to see what you guys think. Cheers
 

 

The guy who runs that channel is a bit of a quack in terms of the hair-loss science he talks about. Not a fan at all.

All the scalp tension and skull expansion theories have no reputable evidence to back them up and have been disproven...

Also, did you not post this video the other day, or was that someone else?

[follically challenged]

49 minutes ago, JDEE0 said:

The guy who runs that channel is a bit of a quack in terms of the hair-loss science he talks about. Not a fan at all.

All the scalp tension and skull expansion theories have no reputable evidence to back them up and have been disproven...

Also, did you not post this video the other day, or was that someone else?

I wasn't aware of the 'skull expansion theories' but this video doesn't seem to be of his opinion, it seems to be based on studies and opinions of experts. 

And no, i haven't posted this before, only just came across it. 

[JDEE0]

7 hours ago, follically challenged said:

I wasn't aware of the 'skull expansion theories' but this video doesn't seem to be of his opinion, it seems to be based on studies and opinions of experts. 

And no, i haven't posted this before, only just came across it. 

My bad, someone else posted it literally a few days ago.

I haven't looked into the studies he cites in the video (or even watched it) as he doesn't link them in the comments or anything, but I already know the theories have been quashed many times before by people more knowledgable than me.

Here's a video that largely counters Rob's arguments if you're interested at all: 

There's also many threads on hairlosstalk about the theory as well if you have any interest in reading more about it, just google hairlosstalk scalp tension and have a read of the ones that pop up.

 

 

[follically challenged]

34 minutes ago, JDEE0 said:

My bad, someone else posted it literally a few days ago.

I haven't looked into the studies he cites in the video (or even watched it) as he doesn't link them in the comments or anything, but I already know the theories have been quashed many times before by people more knowledgable than me.

Here's a video that largely counters Rob's arguments if you're interested at all: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfLvjEjdcnE

There's also many threads on hairlosstalk about the theory as well if you have any interest in reading more about it, just google hairlosstalk scalp tension and have a read of the ones that pop up.

 

 

Well, i dont know much about him, but he is a doctor right? And you can at least take a look at the video before totally dismissing it 😂 haha

I like Kevin Mann, but that video you posted is lonnnggggg. Which part does he counter the theories listed? From what I've seen he seems to be countering some of his other theories...

I guess i should clarify my original post: I'm not a huge believer in the scalp tension aspect,(certainly not the 'blood flow' stuff,  but i feel there certainly could be more going on UNDER the scalp than we're totally aware of, such as more DHT in certain areas on the front perhaps, as opposed to just having the 'safe zone' DHT resistant follicles. Otherwise, how else could some HTs thin out so much if it is purely FUT (straight from the safe zone)?

. At least that was what the video's studies and experts seemed to be suggesting anyway

[Melvin- Admin]

Never listen to a guy that sells his hair loss advice and promotes scalp massages as a form of hair loss treatment. He has zero clue about hair transplants.

[JDEE0]

15 hours ago, follically challenged said:

Well, i dont know much about him, but he is a doctor right? And you can at least take a look at the video before totally dismissing it 😂 haha

I like Kevin Mann, but that video you posted is lonnnggggg. Which part does he counter the theories listed? From what I've seen he seems to be countering some of his other theories...

I guess i should clarify my original post: I'm not a huge believer in the scalp tension aspect,(certainly not the 'blood flow' stuff,  but i feel there certainly could be more going on UNDER the scalp than we're totally aware of, such as more DHT in certain areas on the front perhaps, as opposed to just having the 'safe zone' DHT resistant follicles. Otherwise, how else could some HTs thin out so much if it is purely FUT (straight from the safe zone)?

. At least that was what the video's studies and experts seemed to be suggesting anyway

I don't know much about him, just that he's a fraud who spouts nonesense, but no he's not a doctor in any way (after a quick google search)... his page say's he's a 'researcher and medical editor' whatever that means, and follows up with him trying to get you to join his websites membership.

As Melvin says, he's just out for a quick buck and uses lots of pseudo science to facilitate this. I'm not saying all of this to call you or your post out by the way, just so that you or anyone reading doesn't buy into these sorts of methods or the guy behind them peddling his membership fees and essentially get scammed and buy into misinformation based on trickery. 

I didn't watch the video because the guy is a but of a fraud, and like I said, I already know that the whole scalp tension angle has no substance, so there's really no need to watch it in the first place seeing as you have outlined that's what is talked about in it.

As for how some HT's thin out when they were taken from the 'safe zone', well, there are no concrete answers to broadly answer the question for everyone who experiences this, but it's far more likely that the person was experiencing some sort of BUPA type hair-loss with miniaturisation in the donor than having anything to do with scalp tension. More people than it is realised have 30+ percent miniaturisation in the donor, including the 'safe zone' which isn't exactly a real thing overall in general anyways.

If hairs are taken from pretty much anywhere in such patients, then it's inevitably going to thin out in the coming years. You can't have say 35 percent of all hairs in the donor experiencing miniaturisation to some degree and not have this be reflected in your results down the line. Go watch some of Lorenzo's vids on YouTube, he has so many cases on there of patients where he outlines that they have DUPA or BUPA. They even look completely normal lots of the time with good donors, but under a microscope have lots of miniaturising hairs throughout the whole donor and not just above and below the safe zone. It will give you a feel for what I'm talking about. 

Besides this, donor hair is just DHT resistant, not DHT proof. Even so, the vast majority of people's transplanted hair doesn't begin to noticeably thin after 4 or 5 years, most people are fine for much longer than this. The rest who aren't could easily be attributed to factors such as mentioned above, so to apply the argument of this guys video to hair transplants overall in general is a bit pointless to begin with. 

As for the donor dominance theory, or the argument that it is inaccurate should I say, this holds more weight and potential truth that the scalp tension stuff, but there is still no evidence for it. As far as we know, it's the hair follicle itself as a mini-organ that holds all of the genetic markers and relevant DNA to make it susceptible to androgens, not any specific area of the scalp. For reasons unknown, the follicles in the back and sides largely are far more resistant and this shouldn't change once moved as, like I say,  it's dependent upon the individual follicles themselves. But still, for this point, who really knows for absolute, maybe in years to come it will be discovered that the recipient site does impact the grafts, but I'm doubtful as the current evidence suggests otherwise.

[follically challenged]

7 hours ago, JDEE0 said:

I don't know much about him, just that he's a fraud who spouts nonesense, but no he's not a doctor in any way (after a quick google search)... his page say's he's a 'researcher and medical editor' whatever that means, and follows up with him trying to get you to join his websites membership.

As Melvin says, he's just out for a quick buck and uses lots of pseudo science to facilitate this. I'm not saying all of this to call you or your post out by the way, just so that you or anyone reading doesn't buy into these sorts of methods or the guy behind them peddling his membership fees and essentially get scammed and buy into misinformation based on trickery. 

I didn't watch the video because the guy is a but of a fraud, and like I said, I already know that the whole scalp tension angle has no substance, so there's really no need to watch it in the first place seeing as you have outlined that's what is talked about in it.

As for how some HT's thin out when they were taken from the 'safe zone', well, there are no concrete answers to broadly answer the question for everyone who experiences this, but it's far more likely that the person was experiencing some sort of BUPA type hair-loss with miniaturisation in the donor than having anything to do with scalp tension. More people than it is realised have 30+ percent miniaturisation in the donor, including the 'safe zone' which isn't exactly a real thing overall in general anyways.

If hairs are taken from pretty much anywhere in such patients, then it's inevitably going to thin out in the coming years. You can't have say 35 percent of all hairs in the donor experiencing miniaturisation to some degree and not have this be reflected in your results down the line. Go watch some of Lorenzo's vids on YouTube, he has so many cases on there of patients where he outlines that they have DUPA or BUPA. They even look completely normal lots of the time with good donors, but under a microscope have lots of miniaturising hairs throughout the whole donor and not just above and below the safe zone. It will give you a feel for what I'm talking about. 

Besides this, donor hair is just DHT resistant, not DHT proof. Even so, the vast majority of people's transplanted hair doesn't begin to noticeably thin after 4 or 5 years, most people are fine for much longer than this. The rest who aren't could easily be attributed to factors such as mentioned above, so to apply the argument of this guys video to hair transplants overall in general is a bit pointless to begin with. 

As for the donor dominance theory, or the argument that it is inaccurate should I say, this holds more weight and potential truth that the scalp tension stuff, but there is still no evidence for it. As far as we know, it's the hair follicle itself as a mini-organ that holds all of the genetic markers and relevant DNA to make it susceptible to androgens, not any specific area of the scalp. For reasons unknown, the follicles in the back and sides largely are far more resistant and this shouldn't change once moved as, like I say,  it's dependent upon the individual follicles themselves. But still, for this point, who really knows for absolute, maybe in years to come it will be discovered that the recipient site does impact the grafts, but I'm doubtful as the current evidence suggests otherwise.

OK, thanks for the detailed response anyway!

[follically challenged]

...and has the video been removed?! I can no longer see the link that i posted in my original thread lol 😅

[Melvin- Admin]

6 hours ago, follically challenged said:

...and has the video been removed?! I can no longer see the link that i posted in my original thread lol 😅

Yes, I removed it previously too, I don’t want to promote nonsense and promote a guy who sells hair loss advice.