I’m Your Controlled Masturbation and Hair Loss Study!

lol Dr. Rassman,you say that masturbation has no effect on mpb but then how do you explain that when i stop masturbation for 3 days,my hair feels and looks stronger and thicker and the longer i dont masturbat,the better it gets..but when i do masturbate,my hair looks and feels weaker and thinner..you asked for a controlled study,im your controlled study..my father is bald,my brother balded so im geneticaly set for mpb but using certain methods and limiting masturbation to a minimum,i seem to have some control over my genetic mpb..i think someday you will see that we are right

I think you should go back and look up the what a controlled study actually is. I am posting your email because some other men may feel as you do, but there is no evidence for your thesis. Everyone is in control of what they do with their body, like when they choose to use non-approved topicals on their hair or the frequency of masturbation. If you think your hair is better now, congratulations.

I Am 19 and Think That I May Be Developing a Norwood Class 6 or 7 Pattern.

If you are heading to a Class 6 or 7 at the age of 19, although it is unlikely that the drug Finasteride will prevent this, it is still worth a try.

Maybe you are not heading to the Class 6 or 7 pattern, and you inherited a different pattern that is not so advanced. There is no way to really tell. Most people don’t know that these advanced patterns almost always happen before a young man reaches 26 years of age.

Is it even worth fighting at this age? from tressless


2018-06-21 09:24:50I Am 19 and Think That I May Be Developing a Norwood Class 6 or 7 Pattern.

In Defense Of 1990 Hair Transplant Technology – Response To Previous Post

Doctors generally want to help people and doctors use what tools are available to do just that. Unfortunately, the hair transplant technology that was available prior to 1992, was a very limited technology. It was used by hundreds of doctors over decades and consisted of two types of surgical procedures. The scalp reduction, which removed the balding scalp on the top and back of the head, and hair transplant plugs that were removed from the back of the head and placed in the front of the head. As these patients grayed, their plugs became less detectable so time worked in favor of the patients who were deformed by some of the old technology.

The Scalp Reduction: Conceptually, removing the bald scalp behind the hairline from front to back might have made sense if the hair on the sides could be stretched to cover the removed scalp. As the hair on the sides never balded, this side hair might theoretically have done the trick. This, however, was not what really happened. I, for example, had three of these procedures done on my head in 1992 and this caused me no end of grief. A scar was present in the center of my head and my scalp was paper thin, bleeding from the slightest touch. That alerted my perception of that this procedure that it was a bad procedure and I made it a personal campaign to stop it from being done. I even went as far as to publish an article and present it before the international society telling all the doctors that this was a bad procedure and if any patient wanted to take legal action against any doctor performing it, I would act as an expert witness when asked. That did not make me popular, but I succeeded in stopping this procedure from being done. Thousands of people had been victimized by it. The doctors; however, did not really understand the consequences of this procedure and as it was the “Standard of Care” at the time, they just continued to offer it and did in on those people who seemed, to them, to be good candidates. The lesson here is that doctors must always think twice about what they are doing and listen to their patients. Anyone, like me, could have told their doctors about the evils of the scalp reduction. Unfortunately, there is a herding instinct in people and doctors are just people, but doctors are special people who are intrusted to be better than the ‘herd’, and must always think twice, or more than twice about what they are doing. Maybe I was responsible for stopping the scalp reduction from being done, but it should have happened well before I became a victim of it.

The Hair Plug: What a marvelous innovation it was. A hair from the back of the head would live as long as the patient lived, even if it was moved elsewhere. It started in 1959 on a commercial level and doctors and the public quickly became enthusiastic about it. Imagine hair in front of a bald mans head! As a person started to thin from genetic balding, doctors became aggressive as patient wanted to stop the balding process and surgery seemed to be the answer, so doctors put these plugs behind the hairlines to make it look fuller, and it worked, at least for a while until the progressive nature of balding continued and the thin hair disappeared, leaving the large plugs behind. Doctors quickly picked up on this and started to fill in between the plugs so more plugs were needed. Some doctors used parts of a plug, so that they were smaller to fit better into the large white spaces created by the original surgery, but no matter what was done, it was never perfect because the plugs just could not be disguised for what they were. Many doctors tried to fix the problem, but they nevertheless continued to create more of the same problems.

Innovation to fix this problem really started in the late 1980s. I am not sure why it took so long considering that hair transplants were going gang-busters since 1959. A friend of Frank Sinatra who I performed hair transplants on in 1994, told me of the hatred that Sinatra had for his hair transplant surgeon. He was ‘plugged’ and had to wear a hair piece, a wig, for his entire life because of it. He could never graciously accept balding once he started the hair transplant process. In the late 1980s, Dr. Manny Marritt figured out that smaller grafts could look more natural and that if these smaller grafts were kept to the forelock area, even a very bald man might look good. He spoke at medical meetings about his idea. But just how small? That was the problem. Dr. Ubel in Brazil offered small grafts in larger sessions in about 1990 along with the Mosher Clinic in Germany and patients flocked to their doors. After doing my research, I entered the hair transplant field in late 1991 and knew that small grafts in large quantities were the way to do this surgery. But how small and how many were the questions I had to answer. So I visited Dr. Marritt and saw what he was doing and I knew that they had to be smaller than he created them. That required a completely new technical skill that I had to develop and perfect, so that is how it all started. By 1992, I was doing 1000 grafts, by 1993-4 I had gotten to as many as 4000 grafts of very small grafts, essentially the follicular units that we use do today. Publications by Dr. Bobby Limmer in Texas helped me focus on graft size. Once I got going, the line-up at my office was massive and bingo, I became a successful hair transplant surgeon. Other doctors saw my success and they quickly adapted the techniques that I published in medical journals along the way. The old plugs had died.

2 months on finasteride (different lighting in photos)

So many men want to see benefits if they take finasteride and show it off, but they are not photographers and differences in views (position) and lighting make it impossible to see what they think they are seeing


2021-07-01 08:58:282 months on finasteride (different lighting in photos)

In the News – Controversy in PSA Testing for Prostate Cancer in Men of All Ages

Snippet from the non-hair-loss-related-but-still-impotant article:

Prostate cancer screening has become increasingly polarized, with experts weighing in on both sides of the equation. The draft recommendation issued by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in October 2011 ignited the controversy — like pouring gasoline into the fire.

Now 2 experts with opposing views on the USPTF recommendation offer evidence for and against routine screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. The point–counterpoint appears in the March issue of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.

The USPTF draft recommendation advised against routine screening with the PSA test, as reported at the time by Medscape Medical News. The USPTF had previously recommended against routine PSA screening in men older than 75 years, but the draft extends that to all men. It gives routine screening in men younger than 75 years a “D” rating, which means “there is moderate or high certainty that the service has no benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits.”

Read the rest — PSA Testing Continues to Polarize Medical Community

I know this isn’t a hair loss related entry, but it is an important issue I wanted to discuss. So what is this all about? In patients with prostate cancer, a protein (PSA – prostate specific antigen) is found in the blood. It is a cancer marker and like many cancer markers that are detected early (like in a pap test for cervical cancer) their presence means that the person who has tested positive, has cancer of that particular organ.

It has always been a goal to try to detect cancer early enough to produce a cure; however, it is thought that some breast cancers and now even the prostate cancers may never grow enough to be life threatening. If a woman has an in-situ breast cancer that will never grow (can be detected in about 10% of women who were autopsied) or potentially threaten her life, should the breast come off if it is present? That is the question.

For the prostate, even if the cancer grows as the PSA blood test indicates that it does (and biopsies often confirm its presence), is the treatment worse than the disease? Few patients with known prostate cancer ever die from the disease, as they usually die from other diseases like stroke and heart disease. If a man undergoes a prostate surgery, or radiation therapy, or other radical treatments to treat the prostate, their quality of life is often impacted by urinary and fecal incontinence (having to wear diapers for the rest of their lives), have chronic pain from surgery, lose their sexual capability, have their testicles taken off, etc.

The men who have extensively researched treatments for their prostate cancer easily get confused by the various doctors and their prejudices for treating the disease. The surgeons wanted to take out the prostate, the radiation therapist wanted to radiate the prostate, and so on. The medical community is “up in the air” on what to do to manage the wide differences between opinions of experts worldwide.

Now to add more confusion to the discussion, some small percentage of patients do die from prostate cancer, and when the disease spreads to the bones, there could be severe pain associated with the metastasis; but the problem is that today’s doctors do not know which patients with known elevated PSA tests will develop the virulent metastatic “killer” prostate disease. The decisions for the patient are like playing Russian roulette with the quality of what remains of their life.

20 years after a hair transplant

There is no doubt that this man, now in his mid-50s, looks younger than his balding before state. I did his surgery 20 years ago and it is always a pleasure seeing my older patient. He maintains his hair situation from progressing by taking finasteride which he has been taking since 2002. He has no side effects. I want those of you who are looking at his hairline and see if you can see that this man had a hair transplant. I can’t tell even today. His hair transplant shows the value of a 1/4 inch transition zone made up with around 350 single hair grafts in front of the 2 and 3 hair grafts that bring on hair bulk. This shows that the hairline is not a ‘line’ and it should never be. The transplant does not need the finasteride to hang in for his lifetime because these hairs came from the back of the head where the hair is lifetime hair.

In the News – Finasteride and Breast Cancer

Snippet from the article:

New warnings will be added to the packaging of Finasteride after five men in Britain taking the drug developed breast cancer.

An analysis by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency found a total of 53 men worldwide on the drug had developed breast cancer.

The report from the MHRA said: “Cases of male breast cancer have been reported for finasteride, and the review suggested that an increased risk of male breast cancer associated with finasteride use cannot be excluded.

“Patients using finasteride products should be advised to promptly report to their doctor any changes in their breast tissue such as lumps, pain or nipple discharge because these may be signs of a serious condition, such as breast cancer.

Read the full article at Telegraph UK

Keep in mind that this is for men taking the 5mg dose of finasteride for use in treating the prostate. The number of male breast cancer patients is so low that making statistical sense out of the data is relatively impossible. Warning labels after 53 men out of over a million men that take the medication developed breast cancer? It seems to me that this will create unnecessary fear by putting a warning right on the packaging, as I don’t believe there are any other warnings listed on the packaging itself (at least not on the US version that I’ve seen). Obviously, 53 out of a MILLION is not something I’d worry about. I have a greater risk of being hit by a car.

Balding Blog – 2008 – Hair Loss Information

Hello Dr.
I am 21 years old and i have been using Rogain and Propecia for a long time( about a year). Unfortunately I have not had a positive result from these medicines. I lost hair since I was 15. I am norwood 1 or 2. I have heard about an oil called Rejuvenating Oil including oils from plants such as:

Olea Europaea (Olive) Fruit Oil, Sesamum Indicum (Sesame) Seed Oil, Arachis Hypogaea (Peanut) Oil, Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis (Sweet Almond) Oil, Simmondsia Chinensis (Jojoba) Seed Oil, Juglans Regia (Walnut) Seed Oil, BHT, Cananga Odorata Flower Oil, Lavandula Angustifolia (Lavender) Oil, Gardenia Florida Oil, Geranium Maculatum Oil, and also chemicals such as: Chlorphenesin, Amyl Cinnamal, Benzyl Alcohol, Benzyl Benzoate, Benzyl Salicylate, Citral, Citronellol, Coumarin, Eugenol, Farnesol, Geraniol, Hydroxycitronellal, Isoeugenol, Limonene, Linalool

Are these oils really helpful ?

Block Quote

Olive oilNo, the oils probably do not help with your hair loss. Of course, you’re welcome to try the product out for yourself, but I don’t see anything in that list that will cause your hair to regrow.

My question to you is why did you use Rogaine (minoxidil) and Propecia (finasteride) when you classify yourself as a Norwood 1? Plus, I’m not sure what you’re looking for as far as results that have lead you to believe there was no positive result. Are you expecting complete regrowth, or do you know that just seeing the hair loss halt is also considered a positive benefit? As you can see, after reading your email I’m left with more questions than answers. There is something wrong with your logic, and unfortunately without an exam and better medical history, there isn’t much I can offer you.