Hair Growth Signal Dictated By Fat Cells 146
RogerRoast writes "According to an article published in the journal Cell, molecular signals from fat cell (adipocyte) precursors under the skin are necessary to spur hair growth in mice. Yale researchers report in the paper that these cells produce molecules called PDGF (platelet derived growth factors), which are necessary to produce hair growth. The discovery of the source of signals that trigger hair growth may lead to new treatments for baldness. The trick is in getting adipocyte precursors under the skin to talk to stem cells at the base of the hair follicles."
So this means... (Score:0)
...That the average American now has another excuse for his obesity?
Re:So this means... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:So this means... (Score:5, Informative)
That's a negative, Red Leader. While you get more adipocytes when you gain weight, you keep them after you lose it [wikipedia.org]. Get back on the treadmill!
Mod parent +Informative, because... ...shit, I start pulling my hair over this!!!
The horror: after you gained them, you need to stay on thread mill for years to get them back to the previous level (increase them exponentially, lose the linearly).
If excess weight is gained as an adult, fat cells increase in size about fourfold before dividing and increasing the absolute number of fat cells present.
...
Approximately 10% of fat cells are renewed annually at all adult ages and levels of body mass index.
Baldness vs hair removal (Score:3)
Re:So this means... (Score:2)
Yes, but without actually reading the article, I assume it means that we're all going to have very hairy bellies.
I'm actually a little ahead of the curve...
Mice skin toupees (Score:3, Funny)
The trick is in getting adipocyte precursors under the skin to talk to stem cells at the base of the hair follicles.
So why not skip all the steps in between, and just sew together toupees of peeled mice?
. . . um . . . warning sticker . . . "Stay away from cats, when in use."
Re:Mice skin toupees (Score:2)
IN MICE (Score:5, Informative)
This finding has been made IN MICE. Now, I'm not usually one to suggest that just because an effect is demonstrated in a lab animal that it won't apply to humans, but hey, saccharine only caused bladder cancer in lab rats because they have a different urinary tract, and they were retaining it in a way that would never happen in humans.
Now, the disclaimer being made, women have a larger dispersion of fat about the whole body, and while they have more vellus hair then men, vellus hair is hardly noticeable, and in fact, "balding" is typically a result of the hair on one's head turning into vellus hair. So, making humans grow more vellus hair isn't really going to solve anything.
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
I know, from the summary title I was hoping for a link between being fat and being bald, since often we men exhibit both characteristics. Disappointments all round. I can take down that banner welcoming our fat, bald, vellus enveloped overlords.
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
I know, from the summary title I was hoping for a link between being fat and being bald, since often we men exhibit both characteristics. Disappointments all round. I can take down that banner welcoming our fat, bald, vellus enveloped overlords.
Well, there's no reason to doubt that fatty tissue could lead to more vellus hair. In fact, since women typically have more of both, it might actually be related in humans. I suppose, the point I was trying to make was that when we think of "hair", we think there is only one kind... silly us, there's actually three kinds. (vellus hair, and two types of terminal hair: on the head, and "axillary hair", which is vellus hair that turns to terminal hair under exposure to testosterone.)
So, it's entirely possible that we could cause humans to grow more hair with this process, we just wouldn't usually call it hair, because we don't typically consider vellus hair to be "hair".
So, don't let your desire to wave your banner wane, there is still a chance that that much might actually apply to humans.
Re:IN CATS (Score:2)
. silly us, there's actually three kinds. (vellus hair, and two types of terminal hair: on the head, and "axillary hair", which is vellus hair that turns to terminal hair under exposure to testosterone.)
Interesting... so which type is the hair that women have under their armpits and around their pussy? Obviously not vellus (it's to thick for that), not head hair (it's preferred by pubic lice rather than by head lice), and not "axillary hair" (where would the needed testosterone come from?)
Re:IN CATS (Score:2)
Women have testosterone, just not as much as men.
Re:IN CATS (Score:2)
. silly us, there's actually three kinds. (vellus hair, and two types of terminal hair: on the head, and "axillary hair", which is vellus hair that turns to terminal hair under exposure to testosterone.)
Interesting... so which type is the hair that women have under their armpits and around their pussy? Obviously not vellus (it's to thick for that), not head hair (it's preferred by pubic lice rather than by head lice), and not "axillary hair" (where would the needed testosterone come from?)
As someone else already noted, it is axillary hair. Women have some testosterone in their systems, but not enough to usually activate axillary hair beyond the pubic area, and armpits. However, since each "axillary hair patch" has a different level of response to testosterone, pubic hair being highly sensitive, and chest hair being quite low sensitivity, women tend to get pubic hair, but not chest hair.
Women with CAIS (Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome... and no, there are no men with CAIS) actually have limited if even any pubic hair, because their whole body lacks sensitivity to androgens regardless of the location on their body. It's one of the first traits that one should use to suspect CAIS: "does she have surprisingly low amounts of body hair regardless of being well into puberty?"
Oddly, in some cases, women may have medical conditions that require a treatment with testosterone. They usually can expect increased terminal hair as a side-effect of the treatment. Namely, the mustache is usually the next axillary hair growth area and may even activate into terminal hair growth even under only natural testosterone levels.
The idea that many of our biological traits are as drastically different as our genitalia has little evidence to support it, and is actually counter to almost the entire evidence available. Functionally, men and women are nearly identical, and use testosterone and estrogen equally, and both tend to respond each to the other just as much as a person of the other gender at the same age. But when we hear, "men use androgens, and women use estrogens", we are naturally drawn by our common sense to assume that this means that those traits are exclusive traits, but they are not. Beyond the state of the gonads (testicle vs ovary), almost nothing is exclusive to only one sex.
Re:IN BEARS (Score:2)
I was hoping for a link between being fat and being bald
There is a link. Hint: very few men wear their fat on the top of their head...
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
You just ruined the days of hundreds of slashdot readers, thanks for the FACTS pal!
Someone mod this guy +5 dream shattering.
Re:IN MICE (Score:3)
You just ruined the days of hundreds of slashdot readers, thanks for the FACTS pal!
Someone mod this guy +5 dream shattering.
I'm also a girl... so the -5 No girls on the internet modding will probably equal the two out?
Re:IN MICE (Score:1, Offtopic)
oops, respect m'am. pls ignore previous profanity.
Re:IN MICE (Score:3)
oops, respect m'am. pls ignore previous profanity.
Fuck that noise. ;)
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
mod this shit funny!
Re:IN MICE (Score:1)
woop! woop!
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
Re:IN MICE (Score:1)
I'm green, bitch.
Re:IN MICE (Score:1)
Yeah, but the upside is huge. Imagine all those mice with all those neat hair styles? It would be a blast.
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
You're not bald right? So shut the fuck up and allow the rest of us to dream.
I can just imagine you sitting there with your ridiculously thick mop of lush hair and pompously stomping on our hopes.
it's a pretty basic pathway (Score:3)
i wouldn't, for example, use mice as a valid model for say, genes having to do with brain structure in human beings. homo sapiens have made some changes in that department as compared to our mammalian cousins or even our simian cousins
but, evolutionarily speaking, we are so close to mice that a cell signalling pathway as basic as this one is most likely shared between mice and men
even if the signalling system were dormant in humans, we most likely still have the genes for it, and it could be revived in human beings under certain conditions
it's valid to talk about something like this in mice applying to humans. it would be exceptional if we did not share the same pathway
Re:it's a pretty basic pathway (Score:2)
You're of course right, and my first paragraph was intended to be a disclaim of "I'm not saying that nothing in lab animals is applicable to humans", but rather, I wanted to point out that "hair" isn't just one thing in humans. There are two types of hair, vellus hair, and terminal hair, and it's entirely possible that this process would only activate vellus hair growth (being that women have more fat on average, and more vellus hair, this seems like a possibility).
My objection was that while this could be used to grow more hair, there is no guarantee that it could be used to grow more of the same type of hair that most people mean when they say, "hair". Because, in fact, bald men don't have any less hair, they just have had terminal hair follicles change to vellus hair follicles. (Excepting the case where a man is bald because he shaved, or used a form of epilation.)
Re:IN MICE (Score:2)
Re:IN MICE (Score:1)
Now, I'm not usually one to suggest that just because an effect is demonstrated in a lab animal that it won't apply to humans
Haven't you read Of Mice and Men?
They'll Make A Fortune (Score:1)
Comment removed (Score:3)
Re:They'll Make A Fortune (Score:2)
Now if they can only find a way to get reverse the hair growth on my back.
Exercise. RTFA!
Re:They'll Make A Fortune (Score:1)
there's several cures for redundancy
Anecdotal (Score:1)
Connection? (Score:1)
Am I blessed with great hair because I am a fat little man?
I imagine that on Slashdot I can't be the only fat man with great hair who can't get a date...
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
I am a fat man that is apparently repugnant to women.
:-)
Despite this, many different women have commented on the quality of my shoulder-length hair.
And how is your chest (and back...) hair?
I imagine that on Slashdot I can't be the only fat man with great hair who can't get a date...
Maybe you are too restrictive in your choice of partners?
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
You cant get a date because you are too "picky" of what you call acceptable. I know a lot of fat geeks that will "only date a hottie".. Yet they also refuse to get any social skills or even bathe weekly let alone the normal bathing cycle. oh and washed clothes, teeth brushing, etc.....
Guess what, you are not gonna get a hottie. So either start looking at realistic pool of women to target or give up. Honestly, 99% of the time it's not just "looks" that is the repulsion. it's personality, interaction and hygene that have 75% of the repulsion factor. And a lot of guys are simply completely idiotic in their expectations.
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
A while back (1980s) my company used to do business with a very rich guy who was short, fat, ugly, with an obnoxious personality and a comb-over. Unlike many like him, he was aware of all of the above. He also had a Ferrari Testarossa, primarily because money + Ferrari was an effective antidote to the rest of his 'features'. It worked. Of course, a typical date cost him $1000s.
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
Meh, he should just get hookers and cut out the red Italian middleman, and save some cash on his dates. I don't see how it could be any worse for his self-confidence than knowing he's just attracting gold-diggers with his wealth.
Re:Connection? (Score:2)
For him and his situation, I think the distinguishing between hookers and gold-diggers was a very thin one (if there was one at all). He knew it wasn't about the relationship - it was a transaction. He got eye-candy, probably got laid, she got fun and 'gifts'.
Is this why bald men are usually slim? (Score:2)
It's not the rule, of course. There are fat men who are bold. But, from what I see, the majority of bald men have little fat on their bodies; they are usually slim.
"There are fat men who are bold?" (Score:2)
Re:Is this why bald men are usually slim? (Score:2)
There are several things working against each other. Fat leads to lower testosterone, which leads to more (head) hair. OTOH, higher testosterone results in more body hair. Lower testosterone (particularly in puberty) allows for the growth of longer bones and a taller individual, which look less fat by comparison. There have been some interesting studies done comparing twins where one suffered from an endocrinological condition (back in the old days) was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrato [slashdot.org]">castrated. One side effect is that castrati didn't suffer from baldness to the same degree the general population did.
I wish I was a mouse/rat (Score:2)
I always hear "may not work on humans." Sounds to me like scientists pretty much cured rodents of all possible disease. Even cancer, now baldness, is no longer a problem for mice.
Re:I wish I was a mouse/rat (Score:1)
No cure...ever. (Score:1)
There is no long term money to be made in curing baldness. The target has always been long term treatment.
Re:No cure...ever. (Score:2)
But that's true of every disease or genetic annoyance. Why invent a cure when you can invent a treatment? The only cures include heinously expensive surgery and artificial device implantation with potential lifelong anti-rejection treatments.
OTOH if there were cures available countries like Sweden with full healthcare coverage would have them, so it's unlikely that they exist but are being suppressed.
Too little too late (Score:3)
I gave up last year, and just shaved my whole head. Done. I hate that look like you're wearing a public toilet seat on your head, AKA the horseshoe. Now, I'd prefer a full head of hair (I love hair) but since I was losing it on top, I decided to get rid of it all - all or nothing. I wish I could've done that 20 years ago, but back then, a fully shaved head was still considered a bit freakish, ala "Mr. Clean". Nowadays it's pretty normal, and that practice is probably here to stay.
I've wondered if alopecia isn't a continuation of human evolution; we've shed most of our body hair, but why would we keep so much on our heads? Maybe it's the last bit to go?
Re:Too little too late (Score:1)
Cheer up!
In the last decade I've saved thousands on hair cut's and shampoo.
Re:Too little too late (Score:2)
And saved a lot of time trying to keep my hair in place every morning.
Re:Too little too late (Score:2)
Idiocracy (Score:2)
"Some had high hopes the genetic engineering would correct this trend in evolution, but sadly the greatest minds and resources where focused on conquering hair loss and prolonging erections."
Well (Score:2)
I'm a bald.
And I don't give a flying shit about hair restoration.
So your calling me a fat head? (Score:2)
So I have long thick beautiful hair because I'm a fat head?
Okay, cool. I still lose more hair in 1 washing then most of you guys have on your head.
So you can call me fat head, or fatty head, and i'll just keep calling you 8-ball, dick head, and of course, baldy.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2, Insightful)
While you're at it, imagine there's no more wars, no more poverty, and endless youth.
That's just as realistic as trying to tell scientists what kind of research they are interested in.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:5, Insightful)
While you're at it, imagine there's no more wars, no more poverty, and endless youth.
That's just as realistic as trying to tell scientists what kind of research they are interested in.
Somehow I think it is more a case of "which treatments will get funding" than "what scientists are interested in".
Re:Idiocracy (Score:1)
Yup, the kind of research that employs million dollars worth of lab equipment it's clearly selected by the researcher's personal interests. Is not like Yale's corporate sponsors or the potential for marketability play any role in selecting research topics.
Come to think of it, who wouldn't chose cracking the secret of baldness over some infectious disease that kills millions of 3rd worlders ? I hear there are many bald men on the Nobel committee, and no AIDS sufferer.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:4, Interesting)
Damn. Beat me to it.
On the plus side, most of the research into prolonging erections has already been done. Apparently there's a sweet spot for ideal duration. So at least we don't have to worry about that.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:5, Informative)
"hair loss": 2.554 research papers
baldness: 14.919 research papers
"erectile dysfunction": 16.292 research papers
malaria: 59.503 research papers
HIV: 229.598 research papers
Just a rough approximation, but it seems there IS research on malaria and HIV going on after all...
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
Damn it, ruining another good Slashdot conspiracy theory with actual numbers. What's wrong with you?
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
You're probably getting false positives for cancer searches: a lot of research that isn't actually targetted at curing cancer gets done with cancerous cells, simply because they're more likely to grow in a petri dish than non-cancerous cells of the same type.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
I would doubt that, honestly. Cancer research gets a staggering amount of money compared to other areas of biological and medical research, and when cancer-derived study-samples are used, they're typically identified by a more specific name, such as "HeLa [wikipedia.org]". Those cell lines are so well-established that researchers don't need to mention more specific names.
Incidentally, modified HIV is often used in human genetic engineering, and you don't hear much about that, either, because the paper authors refer to the modified culture and assume it'll be recognizable (or researchable) to the target audience.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
As the GGGP that was moded "troll", I'd say those numbers are clearly skewed towards the economic interests of big pharma. A disease that kills 1 million 3rd worlders each year gets the 4 times more research than baldness ? And that's indicative to the interests of researchers ? Give me a break.
Of course cancer gets allot of resources, it's one of the leading causes of death for rich white people, together with overeating until your arteries clog or your hart pops.
Now I don't expect rich white people to have any moral imperative to use their resources for saving coloured people. That's comunism. The fact of the matter is consumer buying power is behind these research choices, and no westerner cares about malaria. But let's be honest for a fucking moment, and acknowledge that as far as our wallet is concerned, our baldness is more important than some other's guy life.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:1)
Imagine if all this research went into AIDS or malaria.
Are you currently researching AIDS or malaria right now? If not, why not?
Please don't offer silly excuses like "that isn't my field" or "I'm not a medical researcher." If so, you had the opportunity to take that direction in life and instead selfishly decided to do something that interested you more.
The OP is an example of Idiocracy (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine if all this research went into AIDS or malaria.
Nothing of significance cause I guarantee you that AIDS and malaria research receives more money then one team investigating aspects of how our largest organ works.
Also accusing scientists of not doing "noble enough" research while screwing around on Slashdot is like a fat guy complaining about the form of a sprinter.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2, Insightful)
I think you're a hypocrite.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
Imagine if the time you spend reading Slashdot instead went into learning biology and medicine, and then doing research on malaria yourself.
Imagine if instead of spending money for your past holiday you would instead have given that money to some researcher for his AIDS research.
Imagine if those CPU and GPU cycles you wasted playing computer games would instead have been used for folding@home.
OK (Score:1)
Re:Idiocracy (Score:3)
Have you heard of the term "diminishing returns", or "too many cooks in the kitchen"?
At some point, there will just be a bunch of redundant work, and people tripping over each other trying to get things done.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
Here are the results of the research you asked for:
AIDS: condoms (along with a healthy dose of education)
Malaria: antibiotics (throw in some pesticides and mosquito nets)
Happy now?
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
Condoms help people, that already have AIDS, exactly how? How do they help children born with AIDS? The African rape victims? The recent Korean transplant patients, where they got infected organs because of some diagnostic snafu?
FYI, malaria is not a bacterium. Antibiotics help you exactly as much as condoms. There are antimalarics, but they are expensive, and their side effects can be as debilitating as malaria itself. Also, malaria is becoming resistant.
Not happy yet.
Re:Idiocracy (Score:2)
The point is, both of these cited diseases are manageable.
How do they help kids born with HIV? They don't. So prevent it. HIV is one of the hardest diseases on earth to catch, but lack of education along with a want of 1 pennies worth of latex keeps it spreading like wildfire.
Malaria is curable, don't know what research is needed there unless it is research designed to make people no longer poor or will make drug companies give away their products for free.
Your post is an example of idiocracy (Score:2)
By defining the role of the understudied adipocyte lineage cells in the skin, we have identified that these cells dynamically promote epithelial stem cell activity. Whether cells of the adipocyte lineage also play a role in other processes in the skin, such as tumorigenesis and wound healing, is not known.
This is important information on cell signaling, the implications of which are still unknown. This might be a step in curing cancer, or treating burn victims. The most immediate and attention-grabbing is potential baldness treatment, but that's not the full use of this research.
Anyway, we can already prevent both of those diseases. The continued spread of malaria and HIV is not a failure on the part of researchers. Malaria could be prevented for 3 billion dollars [medicalnewstoday.com]. HIV could be prevented with education and condoms. Baldness, on the other hand, cannot be prevented without expensive drugs, if even then.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2, Funny)
You really haven't seen the shape of my head. The hair is doing everybody a favour... trust me
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Yeah men with well-shaped heads shouldn't worry about baldness. Guys like you and me...should have a mortal fear of it.
But baldness is said to be caused by excess testosterone, and I have a physique so un-manly that if I said it was Zach Braff-like I'd be lying to make myself look better, so I don't think I have anything to worry about.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Androgenic alopecia is connected to an elevation in dihydrotestosterone, not testosterone as such; dihydrotestosterone is involved a few different endocrine processes, and is created when 5-alpha-reductase interacts with testosterone. It's not clear that there's any correlation between elevations in testosterone and male pattern baldness, the production of 5-alpha-reductase and DHT is believed to play the greater role. DHT is a more active form of testosterone that cannot be converted into estrogens, like normal testosterone can and is.
Which is why people take finasteride or avodart, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:4, Insightful)
I wasn't losing my hair at 17 but I am now so rather than prolong the agony I just shave it every day or so.
Hair is all about vanity and insecurity. You want to look attractive but to be honest confidence is more attractive than any hair style. So grasp the nettle shave off all or most of it and get on with living your life. The sooner you do it the sooner your skin tone will even out and you know women love a confident self assured man.
The guy worried about his hair loss isn't that man.
For women hair loss is probably harder to handle and pretty common but again do it bald women have character and attitude both sexy attributes.
There is nothing wrong with standing out from the crowd in fact it is an asset.
There is no cure for baldness just ways of looking a little less bald even hair transplants don't work they look like somebody who has had a hair transplant.
so feck it go get the razor and get on with your life.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:1)
Maybe that's just tangential to baldness, though? If you have a guy with little confidence because he's going through the male pattern baldness thing, he's not going to make as many sales, which is likely going to further deteriorate his confidence in a sort of negative feedback loop.
If these men embraced their position in life, shaved it all off (and kept it short), did some things to bolster their confidence like getting in shape, they'd probably be seen as more authoritative and therefore more trustworthy. It's my experience that women in particular are more attracted to confidence itself than most any other male character trait.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Hair is all about vanity and insecurity.
It also helps keep you warm in the winter, and reduces how easily your scalp gets sunburnt in the summer. So it's not entirely a matter of vanity.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Yeah I don't really give a shit about having hair from the aesthetic point of view, but the two points you mention are exactly right. Also, driving a convertible suffers for the same reasons, plus you're missing out on the "wind in your hair" experience.
One other thing that I discovered is that shaving the head or even just keeping it very short is an additional pain in the ass over a simple, zero maintenance haircut. And some people just look better with some hair, myself included, I think. For some, shaved heads make them resemble chemotherapy patients, while others look like gangsters, neither of which is a desired look most of the time.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
"You want to look attractive but to be honest confidence is more attractive than any hair style."
A LOT of women find a shaved head very attractive. so of you are losing your hair, shave it. Instant solution to the vanity problem.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:3)
Hair is all about vanity and insecurity ... So grasp the nettle shave off all or most of it and get on with living your life.
Isn't shaving it all off a way to hide male pattern baldness, and thus a sign of vanity and insecurity?
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
The way I see it, it's more of a way of embracing the inevitable and taking control of a process that you really don't have any control over.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Yes it is. Unless you go for some of the samurai hairstyles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chonmage [wikipedia.org]
Which look like male pattern baldness :).
Anyway if your skull shape is ugly, shaving it all off isn't that great an option either. I've seen people who unfortunately do "need" hair, while others look pretty good without hair.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
OMG. I have an illness that needs curing! Phone me an ambulance!
I was about 18 when it started. 20 years ago.
I have friends who try and take the piss but it doesn't work. And these days, when they're all going grey, it kind of backfires on them.
I have no problem with it. Neither does the wife. And as life goes on, I get more attention than I ever did.
I can't go along with 'cut fewer times a year' though. I cut mine twice a month down to 1mm, else I end up looking like a tennis ball (and that's more ammunition for the piss taking).
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:3)
I really don't understand the level of vanity that causes some men to be prepared to throw so much money at trying to fix a process that doesn't cause any harm other than in their own heads.
Maybe your hair just wasn't awesome enough.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Well good for you. As for me, every Mother's day I call my mom and thank her for the great hair she brought to my genetic soup.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Thick hair protects the top of your head from sunshine. Do you think that skin cancer is not a problem?
Thick hair protects from mosquitoes and other stinging and biting insects.
Thick hair is an insulator. Bald people can lose a lot of heat from their heads, and may need to wear a knitted cap to sleep in a cold room.
There's more than just vanity involved in not wanting to be bald.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
I really don't understand the level of vanity that causes some men to be prepared to throw so much money at trying to fix a process that doesn't cause any harm other than in their own heads.
Insecurity, not vanity. It's the same reason guys throw away money on "penis enlargement" fraud scams AKA late night infomercials that directly challenge a man's worth based on the size of his "certain part of the male body."
Still, there's a distinction between "I feel like less of a person and I'll do anything to cover up or cure baldness," and "I wouldn't mind having my hair back if there's a cost effective treatment." Though of course, cost effectiveness is a function of income and desire which vary from person to person.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Male pattern baldness isn't the only kind of hair loss and hair isn't all about looks. I'd rather like my nose hairs back so they can filter out dust and stuff; I'd like my eyelashes back so I don't get as much crap in my eyes or get dazzled by the sun; I'd like my eyebrows back so when it rains the water doesn't just pour down my forehead straight into my eyes.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:1, Interesting)
If you're going to kill yourself over some genetic trait that you have no control over then you're a moron and should get over it.
If your biggest problem, is that you're going bald \ are bald, then you have a pretty damn good life, and I shave my head because I'm going bald, so think I can offer an opinion on the matter.
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
Re:I started to lose my hair when I was 17... (Score:2)
It can adversely affect your love life too : I suspect a lot of women are more attracted by a guy with thick full locks than a guy with a shiny pate and a fringe of hair. Most women will claim it doesn't matter to them when pressed on the issue, but I think it holds more weight than they're willing to admit. It just messes with self confidence, feeling that you're not looking your best, so even if women don't care, a guy might feel they do. Balding can close doors in your face- or at least, I should say, it used to. Again, with the modern popularity of the shaved head look, though, I think it's impact is much reduced. I rather like my Mr. Clean look now.
Re:WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS SHIT ALL ABOUT THEN !! (Score:1)
Yeah, the editing has been going downhill for some time now, and with Taco's departure, there is no hope left.