Excessive masturbation and early onset of baldness

Discussion in 'Pornography Addiction' started by thephilosopher, Aug 2, 2013.

  1. zombieguy

    zombieguy New Member

    The baldness gene comes from the mothers side. If you mothers father is bald then there's a chance you could end up bald. Obviously if your own father is also bald then the chances of going bald are even greater.
  2. Odd. My hands are usually cold, too. Never realized the correlation. :eek: But there's a great chance it's possible.
  3. Metal

    Metal Get busy living or get busy dying

    Genetics play a role certaintly, but masturbation helps to compound the problem even further.

    Not necessarily because my friends have a family history of baldness, where mostly likely you don't.

    Obviously those who haven't got the gene are unlikely to start losing all their hair through masturbation.

    But there is a definitely a causation for those who have it, and to pretend otherwise is just another case of denial.
  4. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    First and foremost, it will depend on whether one is born with the MBP gene. If you are born with this gene (like I was), sexual exhaustion/overmasturbation WILL cause hairloss- it's only a matter of time. Clearly, you weren't born with this gene, so this debate doesn't apply to you. But that doesn't mean there's no link for people that were!!
    It's such common knowledge that genetics has a factor in hairloss, that there's no need to debate that. But you seem to be saying that genetics HAS to be the only cause for EVERYONE. If that's your "logic", let me give you an example that points to the contrary. People in my family have beautiful hair, I was the only one losing my hair in clumps. What can possibly explain that apart from sexual exhaustion? The common sense and science points to my overmasturbation as the culprit. Causation and correlation has NOTHING to do with this discussion. It's all about risk factors. There are some heavy smokers that can get lung cancer at age 65. But some non-smokers will get lung cancer in their youth. That doesn't mean smoking isn't a RISK FACTOR, and that you can smoke all you like. If you are born with certain genes, that will put a smoker at an ever greater risk of cancer. Same idea with masturbation and hairloss!!
    You have shown good reading and critical thinking skills on other threads you've written on in the past, looking at both sides and such. But on this thread, you are way off the mark. Guess I will have to take everything you say in the future with a large grain of salt.
  5. Concisus

    Concisus New Member

    My hair's been thinning for several years now, and as an ex-smoker, I can attest to contributing factors having a major impact. After I gave up Smoking, my hair improved significantly after 6-12 months. Your head hair grows on 6 month cycles, so any changes to your diet or lifestyle won't take effect for quite a while. That's why it's difficult to see the correlations.

    I think it's safe to say my hair is going to thin no matter what I do, but when I cut out smoking, it improved greatly, and perhaps my excessive masturbation is also a factor - not the cause, no, but if it's as significant a factor as smoking was, then I'd expect to see some benefits. Whether it is a contributing factor is difficult to say, but it'd be an added bonus if my hair growth did improve. The science is very sparse on the topic unfortunately.

    I'm certainly not blaming PMO for all of my life's problems, PMO is one of my problems. However, PMO addiction has roots in other underlying problems as well, so dealing with one should lead to having to face others.
  6. hogus

    hogus New Member

    Surely every high school biology curriculum in the world includes dominant and recessive alleles? Your family means nothing in absolute terms. It just means it's more or less likely; you can't rule it out because of that.
  7. tsmith1302

    tsmith1302 Active Member

    JerseyJay911, relax.

    Try actually reading what I said next time.

    I said I think MO could speed up the process for fuck sakes! But it would be one factor among many. Including: stress, diet, pollution, etc. And those all take a backseat to genes.

    Since when does every member of a family have the same exact genes? It's possible for somebody to go bald and their brother to have hair you know.

    It's my understanding that science has never confirmed the link between hairloss and overejaculaion.

    I've researched this topic before, and yes it seems to lean in that direction, which is why my personal opinion also leans in that direction. But I've seen it argued both ways and never once found the slam dunk evidence you're claiming is out there.

    So where's the scientific proof you speak of exactly? Do you have peer reviewed studies I can see? Seriously, just post some links and let them do the talking. I'm always interested in doing more research. Only credible websites please, not a bunch of hearsay garbage about how some guy broke up with his girlfriend, jerked off a lot and now he's bald.
  8. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    Yes, not only do contributing risk factors have to be taken into account, but not everyone will have the same risk factors as others. Our DNA's are all quite unique, that's why when it comes to risk factors, nobody can prove that doing activity x HAS to cause outcome y in EVERY single person.

    I came across the Nofap movement by accident, and I though I'd give it a shot. As a PMO addict, cutting down on PMO was extremely difficult. But as I cut down on PMO, I noticed something completely unexpected: my hairloss was also improving! After 7 years of trying failed remedies and solutions for hairloss, it was the last thing I was expecting to see. But I'm not complaining. 8)

    Yes, the life cycle of a hair shaft is extensive, a few years long actually- but this isn't very important. Once I quit casual PMO, I noticed the hairloss difference in a matter of weeks. I have gone to extensive lengths to collect data on how much hair I was losing before and after. When I was a fullblown PMO addict last year (fapping 3-4 times daily for the past 12 years), I lost upwards of 600 hairs per week. I've cut down on PMO significantly since then, and my hairloss has gotten better proportionally. Apart from edging a few times, I haven't touched my cock in like two weeks now. These days, I only lose about 70 hairs/week, and that's a very healthy rate- even everyday people who don't fap lose more hair than that. I'm only losing 1 hair for every 10 hairs that I used to lose, and I haven't changed anything else in my life. I am now in the hair regrowth phase, and within 6 months, I expect my semi-balding head to be filled with hair. Of course, there are some hair follicles that will never come back to life, but what's important is that I've finally found the culprit after 7 years of wasting time and so much money on magic pills to cure my hairloss. It's quite distressing knowing that I was sent down this path by so-called "experts" shamelessly claiming that PMO has no harms and/or that it was a great health benefit. Throughout my teenage years I too, stupidly took part in that school of thought, even spreading their pro-PMO propaganda and shunning anti-PMO folks. Oh, how things have changed! With that said, I feel as though I now have a personal responsibility to inform others of PMO harms through facts-based evidence, no more thoughtless propaganda (from either side).
    Full disclaimer: I am not promising you that your hair will improve once your quit PMO, since your risk factors may be different than mine. BUT there's no harm in trying ESPECIALLY if you believe PMO is also linked to other issues in your life. I mean, what have you got to lose?

    I too, have noticed that several problems in my life are genuinely linked to PMO. That's why I'm on this site. Nobody here is using PMO as some kinda scapegoat for all of life's problems. Anybody that says that's what this site's about is nothing but a troll- people like that deserve to be ignored and isolated.. or simply banned from the forums.
  9. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    Did you bother to read the entire thread before trolling it? Did you miss the part where I point out that my hairloss improved significantly as a result of quitting PMO? Does that also mean nothing in "absolute terms"?
    If I have successfully identified PMO, and only PMO as the culprit, then yes, I have effectively ruled out genetics. READ. Surely every high school reading curriculum in the world.. you know what, never mind, I won't stoop down to your level.
  10. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    Hi tsmith1302,

    I am completely relaxed. You seem to have changed your tone since, and so I will change mines accordingly. Wanting to see more evidence of something is understandable. Claiming that there can't be a connection because "our lens is fractured" is not. From reading your posts, I'm getting mixed signals. You did leave open the possibility that MO may accelerate the hairloss process, although you also went on about causation and correlation, and how it's impossible to draw a link because you, as an individual, have never experienced hairloss as a PMO addict. It's just hard to figure out where you actually stand on this issue.

    This is not a nature vs nurture debate. Genetics absolutely plays a role in hairloss, but this thread clearly revolves around pre-mature hairloss, and as such, the word "genetics" has no place in this debate. Stress, diet, pollution are all risk factors absolutely, but we're on a site geared towards PMO addicts- so let's speak to our audience! There's a much higher likelihood that the people on this site are suffering from hairloss due to PMO than other factors. And just a side note, those other factors like stress generally cause hairloss in the same mechanism as excessive PMO does- by raising DHT levels. In terms of my experience with hairloss, I've already explained that PMO was in fact the culprit. If I have successfully identified PMO, and only PMO as the culprit, then yes, I have effectively ruled out genetics. Never would I imply that everyone in a family has identical genes.

    Since when did science only come in the form of peer reviewed studies? You're seriously confining an entire field of knowledge to just peer reviewed studies? As has already been pointed out on this thread, peer-reviewed research on the PMO=>hairloss link is sparse/non existent. But does that discount the experiences of countless many people (myself included) who have seen their hairloss improve as a result of quitting/reducing PMO? There is no peer reviewed research on PMO's effects on ED either. Do you go on all the countless threads about PMO causing ED and ask for peer reviewed studies on a PMO=>ED link before you trust them? Does that mean that the people (such as yourself) who have first hand experiences of PMO harms need studies to know PMO's harmful effects?
    Allow me to let you in on a little something. There are practically no peer reviewed studies on the effects of PMO, period. Why? Because they don't get funding. And why's that? Because they won't result in billion dollar drugs for pharmaceutical companies (read: marketing companies) like Pfizer and such. This is a slight oversimplification of course, but it's not a stretch. This all results in biased research, and that's why it's never a good idea to rely solely on peer reviewed studies to reach sensible conclusions. You will even have so-called peer reviewed studies literally contradict each other!
    Going back to my smoking/lung cancer example, but did you know that it wasn't until the 20th century that studies came out showing a link between smoking and lung cancer? If you went back to the 19th century, and tried to warn the public about the dangers of tobacco, you would have been met with the same denial you've shown here on this thread. The denialist mentality would have been compounded by the fact they mainly published studies purporting the medicinal effects of tobacco ("studies" funded by tobacco companies I'm sure), and that's what the medical community peddled back then, imagine that! This is why something that's not peer reviewed is not necessarily "hearsay". Sometimes you have to make yourself (and in this case, other netizens) the guinea pig. THAT is what science looks like in its most basic form. Remember the word "science" comes from the Latin "scientia"- meaning knowledge. As a trained scientist, I can attest that making discoveries involves following the scientific method with an open mind, NOT embarking on projects with preconceived notions and/or vested financial interests.

    And if it helps, there are actual peer reviewed studies that show that orgasms lead to a spikes in DHT and other hormones, another study showing that DHT "shortens the anagen phase and miniaturization of the hair follicle, which results in thinner and shorter hair". Put two and two together, what do you get? Also another study showing dopamine spikes causing hairfall in vitro (think dopamine agonists aka. chemo drugs that cause cancer patients to lose all their hair). Anyway I came across these studies within two minutes of basic Google searching, not sure why you need me to spoonfeed the studies to you?
  11. hogus

    hogus New Member

    It's not just one or the other, PMO might have exacerbated the symptoms of the gene if you have it. The fact that many other people who PMO a lot don't get hair loss implies pretty definitively that there's some other variable that you're not considering and the only serious candidate is genes (compared to diet etc).

    And fuck me, calm down. I didn't say anything about PMO or genetics or hair loss or the cause - just that if your family has good hair it doesn't mean you will, only that you're more likely to. Which is 100% true.
  12. tsmith1302

    tsmith1302 Active Member

    Jersey Jay, fair enough. I agree my post was kind of all over the place but that's because my stance on this issue is pretty loose. I accept the connection, with a good dose of skepticism, I guess you could say.

    And also I do agree that if something isn't on big pharma's agenda good research can be pushed aside or underfunded. It's a sad reality of the world we are living in but a very relevant point for you to bring up.

    Understand that my post was in response to Metal's post who basically said, if you're going bald at a young age, blame masturbation (plus genes). Honestly I thought he was being a dick and just making people feel bad. If I was balding and addicted to porn that's the last thing I'd want to hear. So I tried putting a positive spin on it, like yes PMO doesn't help but it could also be XYZ, which is true.
  13. Metal

    Metal Get busy living or get busy dying

    It wasn't my intention to make anyone feel bad, but the truth is the truth. I'm not going to tell people children stories on the joys of masturbation or how masturbating makes you feel like a man or puts hair on your chest.

    What's the point of lying? If anything it gives those people the chance to reverse the balding process and gives them more incentive to stop pmoing so they can grow some hair back or stop going completely bald.

    There have been studies already done on the effects of masturbation in how it messes with people's hormones where it starts converting testosterone to dht which those who have the bald gene will lose hair.

    Thats just the way it is,
  14. darkwolf

    darkwolf New Member

    Can't be certain about this but after 4 months of nofap I think my hair loss is slowed and existing hair feels thicker and more resilient. I wonder if I'll see any noticeable regrowth, althought I'd be surprised. (And no, I'm not using any new hair care products.)
  15. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    My hairloss stopped after quitting PMO, this would suggest that it is one or the other. If I start losing hair in my 40's, I wouldn't associate that with "early onset of baldness". THAT would be genetic. It's crucial to examine the circumstances of an ailment before making conclusions about its causes and treatment options.

    I believe it's still inconclusive at best. Here's why.
    -So there are people who PMO a lot that don't experience hairloss, but what is "a lot"? Is it once a week, 5x, or 10x? Using qualitative indicators like that could potentially mean a large variation in the actual frequency of PMO.
    -And even if we assume a specific frequency to constitute for what means "a lot", people can still have difference tolerance levels. For instance, person A will exhibit hairloss if he PMO's 10x a week, but person B will exhibit hairloss if he PMO's 5x a week.

    That's why it's a good idea to cut off PMO for a while to reach your "baseline", and then slowly work your way up to see how many times you can PMO safely without losing hair. Of course, this experiment will present a conflict of interest to the folks on this forum who are actively battling a PMO addiction, and they probably shouldn't be encouraged to masturbate in any case. But I'm just laying out a research method for those who might be so inclined.
  16. zombieguy

    zombieguy New Member

    If you believe the internet, creatine has also been linked to DHT and possible hair loss. I guess if you're PMO'ing and using creatine, and you have history of male pattern baldness in your family, then it's a bad combination.
  17. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    Yeah I do see what you mean about the post that Metal made where he was implying that genetics doesn't have a role in hairloss. I can't speak for him, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt on this. If he was specifically talking about early onset of baldness (remember that's what OP's question was about), then he would be technically correct. Genetics doesn't affect early onset of baldness- hence why it's called "early onset" lol. In any case, I would still ask Metal to clarify his thoughts before pigeonholing him into an argument that he never made in the first place.

    Metal was actually responding to a post I had written, and if you look at my post, things might make more sense. I believe Metal was talking about how everyone automatically tries to blame genetics for hairloss of ANY kind. Basically, people refuse to believe the harms of PMO, because, to do that would inconvenience their PMO addiction= oh no's! Classic denialists.

    Alternately, these people (even the so-called experts) may also not be educated like we are. I'll give you an example. I went to see a dermatologist last year for my excessive hairloss. This guy's a successful MD with like 40 years experience. He takes a look at my hair and tells me that there's nothing I can do about hairloss, since hairloss is all genetic. He writes me a prescription for some crap and sends me home. THAT made me feel terrible, far worse than any post on this thread could make you feel! To be fair, I didn't tell the doctor about PMO, since back then, I would never have suspected that fapping was the culprit behind my hairloss. And well, if I knew this back then, I wouldn't even need to go see him in the first place. But he could have seen my other symptoms (oily skin/scalp, acne, tired look) and concluded that hormones were imbalanced=classic PMO symptoms ding ding ding!

    So just think about how much more we know than that doctor guy just by following an alternative school of thought. I believe this needs to happen in more areas than just PMO addiction, and we can practically start taking care of ourselves. The medical establishment needs to go away. Doctors need to start listening to their patients to decide the best treatment options, not just reach for that damn prescription form without using their brain. This one size fits all method in healthcare hasn't worked. In fact, that's why our health system is in such a total failure. And of course, doctors need to be educated on the effects of PMO, and more peer reviewed research must take place before that can happen.

    Ok guys, my rant is over! 8)
  18. hogus

    hogus New Member

    Tolerance level is genetic. I don't see how what we've both said contradict each other except for your conclusion that it's one or the other - you have oversimplified the situation by reducing it to you PMO'd and you lost hair, you stopped and you stopped losing hair.
    Yes PMO is a factor but it is most likely effectively a non-factor since only people who are genetically inclined to early baldness find PMO as a deciding variable. It's the only explanation since many people PMO the shit out of their dicks and don't lose hair.

    It's the same as masturbation and porn. M can be a problem but usually isn't on it's own. Same with P but when you combine P and M you're more likely to get problems, but still maybe not depending on your genetics.
  19. JerseyJay911

    JerseyJay911 New Member

    What makes you sure tolerance is genetic? Is there evidence or just theory?

    it's not oversimplification to assume that it's one or the other. Hairloss can either be caused by early onset of baldness, or, genetic component of male pattern baldness (androgenetic alopecia). One doesn't cause the other. That's why at age 20, I had practically the same amount of hair that I should have had at age 40- assuming my 40 year old self wasn't a PMO/sex addict.

    PMO addicts that claim to not lose hair are either less susceptible to its effects, or they are not genetically predisposed to it, or perhaps they're spreading a false agenda. Those are the only sensible explanations. What makes you say that only people with a predisposition to early balding find PMO as the culprit for hairloss? As far as I know, research into this field is practically nonexistent. It's impossible to imagine someone doing such a sophisticated study like that, let alone finding a link. If you have any evidence (large scale studies or even anecdotal), kindly show it to me. If you don't, it's much too presumptive to coming up with theories like that and passing them off as fact.

    Yes, MO shouldn't be a problem for people only battling a porn addiction, but for long time hardcore addicts like myself who have (temporary) hormonal imbalances, it would be foolish to think that MO is harmless. For people like that, it's best to take a break for a while, let the body recharge, and find other hobbies in the meantime.
  20. hogus

    hogus New Member

    Your genetics are what determine your current state given external variables like diet. Of course "tolerance" (as in not tolerance per se, but the way you've used it here) is genetic. "PMO addicts that don't lose hair are either less noticeably susceptible to its effects, or they are not genetically predisposed to it" - so do you agree with me or not?? This is very confusing.

    Early onset of baldness is in part, a symptom of the genes and combinations of expression that control it. They are not two separate things. If you're saying not all early hair loss is androgenic alopecia, then maybe (I don't really know much about the different genetic causes of hair loss) but genetics are always a parameter to consider. You are never going to find a peer reviewed study that concludes genes play a part in hair loss, early or not, because it's so obvious!! Genes are the framework in how all bodily states are determined when you control external factors.

    If we accept the notion that genes play a role in hair loss of any kind (and I have no idea why that's being disputed) then we accept PMO can synergize with genetic predisposition to cause hair loss in cases where the genetics themselves aren't sufficient. Consider this: given all other variables like diet and exercise are good, people who don't PMO and have good genes don't lose hair, people do PMO, have good genes and do/don't lose hair, people don't PMO have bad genes and do/don't lose hair and some people do both and lose hair.

Share This Page