The Natural Cures

Vitamin E (Tocopherol) as a Hair Loss Treatment 

There are a number of herbal supplements out there that claim to work as a treatment for hair loss.  Whereas there is no question that marketing is over-reaching at best in order to sell a product, the real question that any hair loss sufferer asks is: will this product help combat baldness or is there any chance that it will regrow hair?  To date however, it is important to understand that there is no hair loss cure, therefore realistic expectations must be kept when considering any hair restoration product.

Below I decided to take a look at an herbal supplement that has been said to combat hair loss.  This product is an “active” ingredient in a few hair loss remedies such as HairMax MD.  Vitamin E is also sold as a stand alone product in nutritional stores. 

Vitamin E (Tocopherol)

Vitamin E consists of 8 molecules, four of which are known as tocopherols (one of the ingredients in HairMax MD), the other four known as tocotrienols. Both tocopherols and tocoltrienols consist structurally of a chromanol head and a phytyl side chain. The difference between these 2 types of molecules has to do with the phytyl side chain where tocopherols are fully saturated and tocotrienols are not. Tocotrienols contain three double bonds at the 3, 7, and 11 positions. Ultimately, these two types of molecules are distinct entities and not derivatives of one another. (Theriault et al, Clinical Biochemistry (1990) 32(5):309).

So why take the time to explain all this? From my research it seems that there may be clinical evidence to suggest that tocotrienols may be moderately beneficial for hair loss sufferers – but there is little evidence to suggest that tocopherols are, at least not by themselves.

Another interesting fact is that tocopherols, though mentioned in some patents of the so called hair regrowing agents, are not the major active ingredient but only act as an aid to the formula itself.

A clinical study was performed on 19 balding individuals (14 men and 5 women) ranging from the ages of 23 to 59 suffering from genetic hair loss who have not received any other type of hair loss medication including minoxodil, finasteride, or ketoconazole. 11 volunteers received a capsule orally containing tocotrienols and alpha-tocopherol while 8 volunteers received a placebo capsule. The results of the study transmitted that all hair loss sufferer volunteers who took the tocotrienol / alpha-tocopherol capsules had at least some increase in visible hairs over the 15 month study which indicates that a mixture of tocotrienol and alpha-tocopherol appears to increase the number of visible hairs in balding individuals. Additionally, out of the 8 volunteers in the placebo group, 2 also experienced hair regrowth. 2 experienced hair loss while the other 4 experienced no change.

To read more about this study, visit: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7211274-description.html

In my opinion, one problem with the study is that the study group was small and one could argue that the hair count increase was either coincidence or that hairs were growing back as part of the natural hair growth cycle.

Keep in mind also that this study shows the effect of a tocotrienol / alpha-tocopherol mixture taken orally, not topically (as some hair loss treatments suggest). Additionally, what part the tocopherol molecule played in the increase of visible hairs cannot be determined from this study.

Conclusions:

Though some nominal evidence exists for the potential benefit of Vitamin E taken orally for hair loss, I would argue that a larger clinical study needs to be performed to rule out coincidence or hair growing back as a result of the natural hair growth cycle. 

In my opinion, it would be better to stick to the hair loss drugs that have been proven: Propecia(finasteride), and Rogaine 5% (minoxodil). As an adjunct hair restoration treatment, Nizoral shampoo or Revita shampoo both containing active ingredient ketoconazole may also be helpful.

Bill Seemiller - aka Falceros
Associate Publisher of theHair Transplant Networkand theHair Loss Learning Center
View my Hair Loss Weblog

Throughout the sanctions imposed on Iraq since the 1991 Gulf War, continued because of failure of the Iraqi regime to submit to UN inspections, concern had grown about their ill effects on the population of Iraq. In addition, Saddam had deliberately hoarded funds excerbating their adverse effects, in order to generate sympathy for the removal of the sanctions. In 1996, the UN set-up the Oil for Food programme for Iraq to address these problems. Under the scheme oil could be sold, and food, medicine and other humanitarian goods could be obtained in return.

Although the Oil for Food programme had some success in countering in the adverse consequences of the sanctions on the Iraqi people, Saddam found a way to subvert the programme, by bribing individuals by supplying them with vouchers for cheap Iraqi oil. This was done in order to obtain support for lifting UN sanctions. and to create another illicit source of funding for his regime and presumably his series of palaces (most of which were built after 1991).

Those bribed included company executives to prominent politicians from various nations. An independent inquiry committee into the United Nations Oil for food was published in 2005 [PDF], and the associated press release stated that “The value of oil smuggled outside of the Programme is estimated by the Committee to be USD 10.99 billion as opposed to an estimated USD 1.8 billion of illicit revenue from Saddam Hussein’s manipulation of the Programme.”

The Guardian reports today that three drug companies have been asked to supply confidential information (emails and files) to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) relating to “dealings in Iraq under the UN oil-for-food programme.”

The move is the latest in the SFO’s 22m investigation into alleged corruption involving UK firms operating in Iraq during the final years of the Saddam Hussein regime. Other companies targeted with similar disclosure demands include several British infrastructure firms.

In a statement, GSK said it did not believe its “employees or its agents in Iraq knowingly engaged in wrongdoing regarding the oil-for-food programme”, adding: “In fact, GSK went to considerable lengths to cooperate with UK government authorities responsible for the UK administration of the programme, and to impose anti-corruption measures when dealing with intermediaries in Iraq.”

AstraZeneca confirmed that a disclosure request had been received and would be fully met. A third drugs firm, the US-based Eli Lilly, which has a UK arm, yesterday said that it too had been asked to supply documents to the SFO.

Last January, the Guardian revealed SFO officials had returned from Washington DC with thousands of documents marking the start of a London-based criminal investigation. This followed a 2005 independent report, commissioned by then UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, into the oil-for-food programme.

The Guardian article goes on to suggest that this may restore the UK’s reputation for dealing with fraud, after the premature end of the SFO’s inquiry into potential corruption involved in a Saudi deal to buy 72 Eurofighter jets from BAE Systems. At the time, Oliver Kamm described this as an unprincipled and stupid decision. These new cases, far from restoring the UK’s reputation, merely highlight that the UK is quite willing to investigate cases which involve a horrendous regime no longer in existence, but choose to avoid investigating a case which involves an appalling regime we continue to do business with. It is a double standard the UK should have avoided at all costs - including lack of Saudi participation in intelligence matters.

Orac has a great post up on the difference between the two:

Scientific skepticism looks at the totality of evidence and evaluates each piece of it for its quality. Cranks are very selective about the data they choose to present, often vastly overselling its quality and vastly exaggerating flaws in current theory, in turn vastly overestimating their own knowledge of a subject and underestimating that of experts. This is perhaps the key characteristic of cranks and the biggest difference between a crank and a true skeptic. In addition, because the mainstream rejects them, there is often a strong sense of being under appreciated, leading them to view their failure to persuade the mainstream of the correctness of their views as being due to conspiracies or money. Antivaccinationists, for example, view the rejection of their belief that mercury in vaccines or even vaccines themselves cause autism by mainstream medicine as evidence that we’re all in the pocket of big pharma. Global warming denialists see the consensus as being politically motivated by the desire of “liberals” to tell them how to live. Evolution deniers view evolution as the result of atheistic scientists wanting to deny God.

Read the whole thing, as they say.

Caring for the donor scar after hair transplantation is relatively easy.  Your responsibility will be to keep the donor area clean by washing the area thoroughly but gently.  I find it helps to run my fingers with shampoo in the donor scar area in a circular motion in order to work off the dried blood that surrounds it.  Keep the sutures/staples in as long as your hair transplant clinic recommends and then after that just keep the area clean by washing.

The other component in properly caring for your donor scar to help minimize the risk of scar stretching is to relax.  Do not put too much strain on the hair transplant scar.  Don’t do any intense weight lifting, stretching, or heavy aerobic exercises for the first several weeks.  Gradually increase your workout routine over the course of several months.  Common sense is the key.  If you feel a strain in the donor area, stop what you are doing.   See the following hair loss Q&A blog: Fitness/Sports After a Hair Transplant for more information.

Also avoid putting your chin on your chest as that will cause additional strain on the back of the scalp. 

You can also ask your hair transplant surgeon how your physiology plays a role in the risk of donor scar stretching.

Those with extremely elastic scalps may have “thin skin” (though this is not necessary true).  The lack of collagen puts these hair transplant patients at additional risk of donor scar stretching.  Keep in mind that donor laxity can be a really good thing and will help maximize the number of follicular unit grafts that can be excised.  But there is a possibility that too much laxity is a sign of a lack of supporting collagen in the skin.  Be sure to ask your hair transplant doctor about this.

I hope this helps.

Bill - aka Falceros
Associate Publisher of the Hair Transplant Network and the Hair Loss Learning Center
View my Hair Loss Weblog

Keep in mind that every hair transplant clinic has their own hair restoration postoperative instructions and they vary.  Therefore it is always best to get detailed postoperative hair washing instructions directly from the hair transplant surgeon.

That being said, I thought I’d share my personal experience with hair washing after hair transplant surgery that worked well for me.

Day 0: (day of hair restoration surgery): Just relax.  Do not wash your hair at all.

Day 1: If at all possible, visit your hair restoration clinic for a postoperative hair wash.  If not, fill a cup with water mixed with shampoo and pour it gently over your head several times.  Gently massage the shampoo into the donor area, cleaning the area around the scar. 

Day 2 and 3: Fill a cup with water mixed with shampoo and pour it gently over your head several times.  Gently massage the shampoo into the donor area, cleaning the area around the scar.  Wash donor area normally working around the scar with care to work off any dried blood.  Apply as much pressure as needed however, avoid using so much pressure that it causes pain. 

Day 4: Assuming that your shower pressure is reasonable and not too harsh - let the water from the shower head hit your head normally.  Massage shampoo in your hands until it lathers.  Gently touch the grafts with the shampoo in the palm of your hands and gently touch with your finger tips.  Avoid any massaging of the transplanted hair at this point.  Continue washing donor area normally from this point on paying extra attention around the scar as to work off any dried blood and keep the area clean.

Day 5: Repeat the instructions from day 4 however, add very gentle back and forth motions with your finger tips through the transplanted hair.  Avoid using your nails at all costs.

Day 6:  Resume normal hair washing but be extra gentle with the hair grafts.

Day 7+:  Begin showering twice a day normally however, use a little extra care of the follicuar unit grafts.  Spend 10 extra minutes in the shower both in the morning and evening massaging with shampoo the hair grafts in a circular motion with your fingertips in order to start working off the scabs.  Avoid using your fingernails at all costs.  Do not apply a lot of pressure.  The trick is to apply a constant circular motion to gradually work off the scabs rather than simply picking them off.  Picking the scabs should be avoided at all costs.  Whatever scabs don’t come off in the shower will come off after subsequent showers and circular massaging.  Additionally, when you come out of the shower and after looking in the mirror see some loose scabs, feel free to perform additional soft circular massaging over the scabs in front of the mirror to work off loose scabs.  Scabs still tightly secured to the scalp should not be worked too much.  These scabs will come off after subsequent showers in the coming days. Patience is important and don’t force anything off. 

I have found that by using the above method, scabs typically come off between 8-12 days.

Bill - aka Falceros
Associate Publisher of theHair Transplant Networkand theHair Loss Learning Center
View my Hair Loss Weblog

— Next Page »