Is the "safe zone" a myth?

[calvinmd]

WARNING -- This opinion isn't based on anything concrete. Unsubstantiated conjecture abounds in the road ahead:

 

 

I wonder whether there's really any such thing as a truly 100% "safe zone" at all. From the attention I've paid to MPB cases & results over the years, I've come to suspect that basically ALL male scalp hair is gonna bald if you give it a long enough timeframe. The difference between "balding" and "permanent" hair would only be a difference of degree.

 

So a guy who spends his whole lifetime without any MPB isn't truly 100% immune, it's just that he's immune enough. (If he lived to be 140 years old, he might show MPB by then. Just not within a normal-length lifetime.)

 

Under this idea, the hair loss in both the donor and balding areas would be a governed by a combination of these two factors:

 

1. Amount of genetic susceptibility to DHT in general.

 

2. Amount of contrast between the susceptibility of the "balding" and the "safe" zones.

 

So in this theory, a "diffuse thinner" would be a case of a low amount of contrast between the donor & balding areas, but a high amount of overall DHT susceptibility which is working to take everything out.

 

"Donor thinning" makes sense too. That would happen if there's enough contrast in the susceptibility of the different zones to make a recognizable MPB pattern go bald early in life, but also enough overall DHT susceptibility everywhere to also eventually show thinning in the "safe" zones later on.

 

This theory also doesn't bode well for early-balders. (Does anything ever bode well for this group?) It would make sense that earlier onset of MPB means there's probably more general DHT susceptibility. It would fit the idea that earlier MPB = worse donor thinning likely over time.

 

 

------------------------------------------------

[calvinmd]

WARNING -- This opinion isn't based on anything concrete. Unsubstantiated conjecture abounds in the road ahead:

 

 

I wonder whether there's really any such thing as a truly 100% "safe zone" at all. From the attention I've paid to MPB cases & results over the years, I've come to suspect that basically ALL male scalp hair is gonna bald if you give it a long enough timeframe. The difference between "balding" and "permanent" hair would only be a difference of degree.

 

So a guy who spends his whole lifetime without any MPB isn't truly 100% immune, it's just that he's immune enough. (If he lived to be 140 years old, he might show MPB by then. Just not within a normal-length lifetime.)

 

Under this idea, the hair loss in both the donor and balding areas would be a governed by a combination of these two factors:

 

1. Amount of genetic susceptibility to DHT in general.

 

2. Amount of contrast between the susceptibility of the "balding" and the "safe" zones.

 

So in this theory, a "diffuse thinner" would be a case of a low amount of contrast between the donor & balding areas, but a high amount of overall DHT susceptibility which is working to take everything out.

 

"Donor thinning" makes sense too. That would happen if there's enough contrast in the susceptibility of the different zones to make a recognizable MPB pattern go bald early in life, but also enough overall DHT susceptibility everywhere to also eventually show thinning in the "safe" zones later on.

 

This theory also doesn't bode well for early-balders. (Does anything ever bode well for this group?) It would make sense that earlier onset of MPB means there's probably more general DHT susceptibility. It would fit the idea that earlier MPB = worse donor thinning likely over time.

 

 

------------------------------------------------

[MrJobi]

Hi

 

Good post.. Personally, I have always been suspect to doctors that take the donor strip high on the sides as these would be the first to go if MPB were to progress. There are a couple of the these situation I have seen from coaltion docs as well. This is why stabilizing hairloss is essential.. My donor strips were taken fairly low, so I feel comfortable with the duration of their life span ( by then hopefully there will be a cure)

[Guest wanthairs]

Yes

 

guys your right. This bother me too, whoch is why I use rogaine on my donor area too. hopefully by the time my dodnor region thins out meaning that my transplanted hairs will go too, there will be some sort of better cure than there is today......

[pushing 40]

Calvin,

I think this is good math and well reasoned. As with anything though, there are always the variables. Kind of like how the standard bell curve can, and often must, be applied to almost anything. I see older bald men who's donor areas are very very thin. But I've also seen 70yr old men with no balding and very very thick donor areas. This meshes well with your formulas above I think.

[calvinmd]

Thanks for the positive feedback.

 

 

The whole thing probably doesn't mean too much for the "average" HT candidate who is 35 years old with small/medium hair loss. But these days we're seeing a combination of younger HT patients + severe raiding of the donor areas with big long strips & FUE work. It seems like this trend has eventual donor thinning problems written all over it.

 

For all the advancements in HTs over the last 15 years, half the gains have been from simply finding ways to raid the donor areas more significantly. Unless some type of HM/cloning becomes a reality, this could still be big trouble. The earlier & more significant balders may just be trading the problematic HT results of the past in exchange for problematic donor thinning later in life.

 

 

------------------------------------------------

[Bill - Seemiller]

I think this is a good topic for discussion.

 

One thing that it's important to remember is that the hair on the sides and back of your head are much safer that the hair on the top.

 

"Donor Thinning" is possible, especially for those who are much older, or for those with medical conditions...but it would be extremely rare that someone would lose their hair in the donor area altogether.

 

So does the "safe zone" really exist?

 

It depends on how one defines safe. But I'd suggest that it does since the risks are significantly minimal compared to the hair in the recipient area.

 

Good discussion.

 

Bill