So What Explains Why Balding Men Have More Body Hair

[Grischbal]

I have insane amount of bodyhair but they are barely coarse, I am balding but it halted lately

 

[yerrag]

More body hair since hair follicles act like the kidney to excrete body waste. With the scalp losing the function of waste elimination, the rest of the body has to make up for it. So body hair increases.

 

[Broken man]

Body Hair Is sign of stress, I developed it after doing night shifts for about year.

 

[SonOfEurope]

Some body hair such as shoulder or back hair... Excessive nose hair might indeed be caused by cortisol increasing adrenal androgens and interfering with optimal progesterone/thyroid - But normal hair on the legs, central chest, pubic hair and of course the beard is a healthy sign of Testosterone (Gonadal testosterone ) and it's natural DHT metabolite in a man with receptors in place.... Testicular testosterone is released alongside Progesterone and doesn't aromatize as much instead follows a healthy metabolism to maintain masculine characteristics.

Don't men usually start the pattern seriously around 40 - 42 years old... When a life of exposure has damaged thyroid and Gonadal hormones in favour of adrenal ones.

A combo of T3+Testosterone+Progesterone+reducing stress and improving lifestyle and body composition would be the best approach at the beginning of the balding process I think.

 

[Mrscorpion360]

Atleast you fixed your health issue, that’s what matters most.

reading your previous comment, man you’ve must been through hell, knowing your family has some baldness which cost you to shed, years of abused by pharma **** I can’t imagine.

what matters is that you’re healthy and it’s great to know that you are doing well.

 

[SonOfEurope]

@Mrscorpion360

Thanks Dude, I went through hell... If you let them the Doctors (most) and psychiatrists will use you as a lab rat. I always defend progesterone because without it it would have taken me a lot longer than 2 years to end a dependency on 2.5 mg k-pins a day and restore my metabolism from hair quality to a naturally lower point of stress and anxiety.

 

[mrchibbs]

Some body hair such as shoulder or back hair... Excessive nose hair might indeed be caused by cortisol increasing adrenal androgens and interfering with optimal progesterone/thyroid - But normal hair on the legs, central chest, pubic hair and of course the beard is a healthy sign of Testosterone (Gonadal testosterone ) and it's natural DHT metabolite in a man with receptors in place.... Testicular testosterone is released alongside Progesterone and doesn't aromatize as much instead follows a healthy metabolism to maintain masculine characteristics.

Don't men usually start the pattern seriously around 40 - 42 years old... When a life of exposure has damaged thyroid and Gonadal hormones in favour of adrenal ones.

A combo of T3+Testosterone+Progesterone+reducing stress and improving lifestyle and body composition would be the best approach at the beginning of the balding process I think.

I think the previous generations, in general, benefitted from better constitutions and basal metabolic rate from their simpler environment and the epigenetic inheritance of their ancestors. Of course it's not like in previous generations life was always easy, but for instance in my family until the 40s-50s people lived quite modest lives but at the very least ate very well, with lots of full fat dairy, roast beefs, organ meats, breastfeeding etc. Common medications included aspirin and methylene blue (!)

They didn't have to deal with a few of the key stress factors of today: PUFAs, darkness, social isolation, EMFs, food contamination, excipients etc.

Of course in terms of other stressors you could mention social stigmas, pressure from the church, hard manual labor (although I'd argue hard manual labor is probably less stressful than a modern office job).

My father, for instance (born in the mid 50s), always had a tremendous metabolism, and had the worst lifestyle ever in the 80s and 90s; fast food 3x a day, smoking a pack a day, doing some drugs for work performance, burning the midnight oil, loads of PUFAs, and aside from gaining some weight by his mid40s, never lost his hair.

Now, however, in his sixties, he has started losing hair within the past 1-2 years and has developed diabetes. He has been training (exercising) quite hard over the past few years as well, and experimenting with his diet and lost weight so I think he's liberated a lot of stored PUFAs contributing to this late onset hair loss. If it continues he'll be quite bald within a few years. Just a few years ago at 60 he had a full head of hair, with no sign of loss at all. Goes to show how eventually, even a solid start to life and good energetic resources won't be enough to save you.

I, on the other hand, was premature, my mom fed me 90's J&J PUFA-laden formula, and I went through serious childhood respiratory illnesses and a gazillion allergies. I was a happy child because of good life environment early on, but still rather low-energy and suffering from asthma, severe nosebleeds and other problems. To make a long story short, a decade later after severe emotional stress and a few bad decisions in a row I lost a lot of hair rapidly, at 21.

I think everybody loses hair, at different rates. And the general perception of men losing hair in their 40s has just been a reflection of the stresses of life accumulating by middle age.

Note: Georgi has a good post somewhere highlighting how body hair development driven by adrenal DHEA often leads to the weird hair growth on the back, shoulders, neck, thighs, buttocks etc. Chest, arms, armpit and pubic hair seems to be more "natural"

 

[Mrscorpion360]

Don’t you think losing hair is normal as you get older? Danny roddy actually mentioned in a interview with the strong sistas saying “guys normally a long time ago are suppose to bald in their Late 30’s or 40’s or 50’s not like 17.”

Not to sound ignorant but it’s kinda true, my dad is losing a bit of hair but at the same time, he had health issues on his own too and diabetes is one of his problems, he has a pretty good head of hair despite being almost 60 but that doesn’t mean it’s going to effect me ((his offspring.)), since it’s age that’s causing the hair loss but at same time, as you know hair loss is related to diseases and stresses mostly.

 

[mrchibbs]

Don’t you think losing hair is normal as you get older? Danny roddy actually mentioned in a interview with the strong sistas saying “guys normally a long time ago are suppose to bald in their Late 30’s or 40’s or 50’s not like 17.”

Not to sound ignorant but it’s kinda true, my dad is losing a bit of hair but at the same time, he had health issues on his own too and diabetes is one of his problems, he has a pretty good head of hair despite being almost 60 but that doesn’t mean it’s going to effect me ((his offspring.)), since it’s age that’s causing the hair loss but at same time, as you know hair loss is related to diseases and stresses mostly.

Relatively speaking, yes. I don't think aging in itself has anything to do with hair loss, but yes the accumulation of various stressors is a function of time. It's a cumulative effect, and at some point men cannot maintain homeostasis and active degeneration starts taking place. We've seen instances of baldness in old age going far back into recorded history. Clearly, it's a common feature of older men to have less hair on the scalp.

Until recently, however, communities with relatively great environments (food supply, lifestyle, sun exposure etc.) like Okinawa, high altitudes countries of South America, India etc. were places where you'd commonly spot 90+ year old men with dark, full heads of hair. Different places have different factors going for them, for example, in Okinawa it's the consumption of high quality seafood/seaweed and therefore an abundance of micronutrients copper/zinc/selenium/iodine/vitamins, compounded over many generations, deepening the process of oxidative metabolism necessary to maintain hair function and pigment, even in extreme old age.

There are a few studies showing these differences, which highlight the futility of the genetic argument. Within one generation, people from these types of places start experiencing early-onset male pattern baldness after they immigrate to say, America. In Japan, with most of the population living in cities and dealing with the same type of horrid environments, baldness is now just as common as it is in the U.S. or Europe. It wasn't the case 30 years ago.

To put more weight to what Danny is saying, I think we're seeing a very alarming trend of the collapse of health in young people. Whereas 20 years ago, baldness in the late 20s or early 30s was considered shocking and "premature", now it's expected. Even 10 years ago, teenagers experiencing baldness was comparatively rare. Now we see stories of boys as young as 13 losing their hair, being almost bald by 17 or 18. It's positively insane.

To me the big difference between say 2010, and 2020 is the EMF exposure. We don't have reliable numbers but 10 years ago there were very little tablets basically no smartphones except a few people with iPhones and Blackberries. The mobile network was 2G or 3G and it was difficult to find your neighbors WIFI networks on your device. Now it's everywhere.

This is a massive scientific experiment, and has compounded the existing issues of PUFAs, social isolation, darkness etc.

 

[Mrscorpion360]

The idea that children and teenagers are losing hair in such a early age and is considered natural and normal mind boggles the hell out of me how blindly ignorant these people can be. When I explained this too my dad a few months ago, he said that’s not normal and his opinion these children are practically sick.

Honestly pharmaceutical companies never helped the underlying cost of hair loss in general without addressing the conflict like nutrition, metabolism etc.

People and PhD scientists like ute deichmann tend to dismiss epigenetics however due to the lack of evidence The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context | Epigenetics & Chromatin | Full Text <—- link where a long toxicity about epigenetics is full of horseshit too them.

Honestly when it comes to genetics and hair loss, it’s still failed miserably, because people as of now, they think hair loss happens for no reason or due to “weak/bad genes.” While in reality there’s no such thing as “bad genes” even a PhD biologist admitted that there’s no such thing as “bad genes.” In the human genome. The genetic determinism is ridiculous and very scary stuff, because I’m so scared to lose my little sister or my mom due to breast cancer.

 

[GorillaHead]

The idea that children and teenagers are losing hair in such a early age and is considered natural and normal mind boggles the hell out of me how blindly ignorant these people can be. When I explained this too my dad a few months ago, he said that’s not normal and his opinion these children are practically sick.

Honestly pharmaceutical companies never helped the underlying cost of hair loss in general without addressing the conflict like nutrition, metabolism etc.

People and PhD scientists like ute deichmann tend to dismiss epigenetics however due to the lack of evidence The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context | Epigenetics & Chromatin | Full Text <—- link where a long toxicity about epigenetics is full of horseshit too them.

Honestly when it comes to genetics and hair loss, it’s still failed miserably, because people as of now, they think hair loss happens for no reason or due to “weak/bad genes.” While in reality there’s no such thing as “bad genes” even a PhD biologist admitted that there’s no such thing as “bad genes.” In the human genome. The genetic determinism is ridiculous and very scary stuff, because I’m so scared to lose my little sister or my mom due to breast cancer.

I would argue there is such thing as bad genes to a degree.

For example Mutations that cause serious defect in normal function severely hindering survival.
syndromes per se

While balding is more or less the succesibility to a bad phenotype.

basically there is cause of balding and then there is the reaction to the cause and that is what makes 95% of what people experience. For example the biggest hit for the balding gene was the AR. That tells me that the reaction to the cause of balding is mainly determined by this gene.

 

[Mrscorpion360]

But why and how? Like do they develop these for no reason despite healthier parents, nurtured very well, overall great lifestyle?

i mean a baldness gene on a child for example? I think this is a terrible way to describe this, it’s like a transgender gene, gay gene, depression gene or an evil gene exist but in reality they don’t.

 

[mrchibbs]

I would argue there is such thing as bad genes to a degree.

For example Mutations that cause serious defect in normal function severely hindering survival.
syndromes per se

While balding is more or less the succesibility to a bad phenotype.

basically there is cause of balding and then there is the reaction to the cause and that is what makes 95% of what people experience. For example the biggest hit for the balding gene was the AR. That tells me that the reaction to the cause of balding is mainly determined by this gene.

I find it a difficult case to argue, especially considering what I mentioned about first-generation immigrants previously believed to be "protected" by their genetic material, experiencing baldness.

I guess if you look hard enough, you can observe genetic activity within any condition, in terms of activation/inactivation of gene expression, but considering genes are unable to explain 99% of common chronic diseases and pathology, this is probably happening downstream of the environmental factors.

Another way to put it: stress does activate epigenetic processes, but it remains the root of the problem, not the genes themselves.

 

[mrchibbs]

But why and how? Like do they develop these for no reason despite healthier parents, nurtured very well, overall great lifestyle?

i mean a baldness gene on a child for example? I think this is a terrible way to describe this, it’s like a transgender gene, gay gene, depression gene or an evil gene exist but in reality they don’t.

Eventually, we'll move past this relic of "defective genes". Of course, it may be an adequate concept for a few diseases, but it is really the vestige of the scientific doctrines of the 20th century, where human physiology was seen as a independent from its environment. Everything was assumed to be random. Focusing on genes as the source of the problem negates the influence of things like hormonal imprinting which is obviously just an ideological choice.

 

[mrchibbs]

The idea that children and teenagers are losing hair in such a early age and is considered natural and normal mind boggles the hell out of me how blindly ignorant these people can be. When I explained this too my dad a few months ago, he said that’s not normal and his opinion these children are practically sick.

Honestly pharmaceutical companies never helped the underlying cost of hair loss in general without addressing the conflict like nutrition, metabolism etc.

People and PhD scientists like ute deichmann tend to dismiss epigenetics however due to the lack of evidence The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context | Epigenetics & Chromatin | Full Text <—- link where a long toxicity about epigenetics is full of horseshit too them.

Honestly when it comes to genetics and hair loss, it’s still failed miserably, because people as of now, they think hair loss happens for no reason or due to “weak/bad genes.” While in reality there’s no such thing as “bad genes” even a PhD biologist admitted that there’s no such thing as “bad genes.” In the human genome. The genetic determinism is ridiculous and very scary stuff, because I’m so scared to lose my little sister or my mom due to breast cancer.

Your dad is right. Those kids are really sick. There is nothing normal about premature hair loss.

They dismiss epigenetics because it scares the ***t of them. The thought of Lamarckian ideas being true is a death blow to their entire life's work, in some cases. Moreover, the genetic approach is so glorified that we're jumping into mRNA vaccines with only a fraction of the evidence which would be necessary otherwise.

There are hundreds if not thousands of good researchers working in the field of transgenerational epigenetics. They don't get a lot of funding, or publicity, but it's impossible to dismiss epigenetics due to lack of evidence without revealing oneself to be a complete fraud.

Thankfully, regarding your mom and sister, Ray has tons of great insights regarding the female biology and there are several key interventions to prevent against breast, ovarian cancer etc.

 

[Michael Mohn]

High Dht increases facial & body fair. High Dht is produced in the skin to oppose elevated estrogen. Same principle applys to enlarged prostate & balding going in tandem with elevated estrogen, opposed by higher Dht. Anti estrogenic substances like vitamin E, progesterone, caffeine, antihistamines can help.

 

[Mrscorpion360]

Yet we have the pharmaceutical companies, new young scientists joining in etc. but the issue here is that stupid somatic mutation theory, which was a theory made by Theodore boveri a century ago but the funny part is that Theodore boveri himself has no experience with cancer in general at all and these people want to maintain that century old theory alive because with that, they make more damaging drugs where they screw things up even further beyond. Honestly the mutation stuff is really scary and f*cked up. With me, it’s not the case of hair loss anymore, it’s diseases which is just murderous killers that happened in general.

Pharmaceutical companies sees us complex humans as this basic machine and it doesn’t work that way. It’s no wonder mainstream medicine rarely works at all and since nutrition is terrible, our health issues is worse, Chris masterjohn does have a pretty damn good ways of nutrition but by the hands of other PhD’s who all they do are just being clowns and their suggestions for nutrition is just awful and they don’t know what they’re talking about or doing.

I just don’t like the fact that you develop this stuff for no reason and i get the feeling these scientists have lost their minds.

 

[mrchibbs]

i get the feeling these scientists have lost their minds.

Looking at the way things are going, it's a pretty safe bet to say that they have.

 

[Mrscorpion360]

I really want epigenetics to be this big thing, but the idea it’s being dismissed just because they tried it on mammals and not humans right? How they said methylation and epigenetics have nothing to do with each other right? How epigeneticist like Adrian bird ((who is influenced by conrad waddington the grandfather of epigenetics.)) find environments and gene expression to be very interesting but the lack of evidence, he’s very skeptical about it, which doesn’t come as a surprise honestly.

I mean they’re against the nurturing part and they’re more geared to the nature part where genes outright controls us and develop diseases in us.

Your mom and dad have been very healthy, your mom has been maintaining herself healthy during pregnancy, you received her breast milk because that’s extremely important for the baby, have great lifestyle, nutrition etc. yet, diseases starts to develop randomly and that’s how people sees diseases being developed due to “bad genes” mutation etc.

 

[GelatinGoblin]

Great last few posts on this thread