Like so many things, it seems that fashions change for no apparent reason. One year it’s one look, the following it may be completely different. It’s similar with hair styles, but it goes beyond styling as far as hair is concerned. Theories also change, and so-called ‘Hair Tests’ are beginning to find a certain amount of acceptance again when I thought they had gone forever, never to return. About twenty years ago there was huge trend towards hair tests because it seemed an exciting and new method. Hair clippings were sent away to a ‘specialist’ laboratory to have them analyzed for vita­mins and minerals. It was thought that the results would give definitive information on the state of your health and your hair. The laboratory would send back a mind boggling list, via a computer analysis, show­ing all your deficiencies or excesses of minerals and vitamins, and on that basis recommend the necessary supplements to put you back on track to a healthier you – and healthier and better hair.

 

It all sounded extraordinarily magical, but I’m sorry to say it was hokum, and the press eventually exposed the method. Hair from the same person was sent to three different laboratories and three dif­ferent results were received. It wasn’t necessarily that the analysis was wrong, but because each batch of clippings were taken from differ­ent sites and were of various lengths, the trace elements deposited on the hair or absorbed into it had to be different. In addition, traces of shampoo, conditioner, styling products and pollution, which are inevitably present, changed the results of the readings.

 

This is a method no longer used by respected professionals in the ‘hair world’ as far as I’m aware, but it is often used by nutri­tionists to analyze a person’s ills. Many people also go to nutritionists for hair advice, thinking that their hair problem could be related to their diet, which may often be the case. As a result, they are given rather absurd advice based on the received readings via the laboratory they send hair clippings to. They are then advised to take multiple supplements, most of which are irrelevant to their hair, to correct the perceived problem.

 

I am not criticizing all nutritionists – there are some good ones, particularly those with medical degrees. Dealing with hair, however, is more complicated than simply addressing nutrition, even though it may be a factor and even if the analysis was valid in the first place. I urge you to think carefully before embarking on these expensive (and certainly irrelevant) tests.

 

The only hair tests that mean anything are trichograms, which test the status of hair growth and what your hair is doing or how it is responding to a particular form of therapy. A trichogram is used in scientific research to measure the hair’s status to give a reason­ably accurate profile. It counts the number of hairs per square centimetre, their lengths cut or uncut and their phase of growth. There are two methods: the plucking technique, whereby a small area of the scalp has all the hairs plucked and measured micro­scopically; and the phototrichogram, whereby an area is shaved and photographed at regular intervals to determine growth factors via counting the hairs.

 

We know from the plucked hair trichogram that, on average, males have more hairs than females per square centimetre – 312 to 279, which works out at approximately 10 per cent more than females and means that men not only have more hairs on their head, but that each hair is thinner in texture. This result is quite surprising, as one would have assumed the opposite. By micro­scopically examining the hair and its root, we are able to see, at intervals, the differences in growth phases and the degree of diam­eter changes. This has shown us that the thinner the hair’s diameter, the shorter it grows, which may partly account for the fact that Oriental women, who have the coarsest hair, can grow their hair longer than any other ethnic group. It has also shown that hairs less than 40 microns in diameter rarely grow longer than 80mm (3% inches). Another point illustrated is that the hairs at the back of the head, towards the base of the scalp, have a smaller diameter than the hairs at the front of the head. The problem with the plucked unit area trichogram, as it’s called, is the trauma of the plucking, which needs to be done at regular intervals. Similarly, the pho­totrichogram, although less traumatic because the area of scalp is shaved rather than pulled out, still results in a temporarily bald area. Either of these methods may be used in the research of new drug effects by pharmaceutical companies, but they are not really necessary in everyday practice.

 

All these characteristics can be seen by an experienced eye with­out expensive trichograms or tests. The changes seen also give us an indication of metabolic disturbances. However, although hair can be an early warning signal of internal body changes, it doesn’t tell us the whole story. Blood tests are needed to verify the exact cause of hair volume changes, some­times together with a sonogram (an ultrasonic scanning device that provides a two-dimensional image and can give an indication of an internal problem such as polycystic ovaries) and other procedures. Looking at the hair can reveal a great deal, but eventually other tests may be necessary. The most important being blood tests.

 

Related posts:

1. The Basics of Hair Loss and Thinning Hair

2. The Basics of Hair Types

3. Middle Eastern Hair Coloring and Grooming

4. Home Electrolysis Hair Removal – Permanent Hair Removal Solution

5. The Basics of Baldness

6. The Basics of Hair – What is Hair?

7. Hair Growth at Puberty

8. Babies, Toddlers, Infants and Children – Hair from Birth to Puberty and Teens

9. The Basics of Human Skin, Nails and Hair

10. Hair Loss in Men