Five-decade study: Black girls build on preschool success, while Black boys struggle in some measures
Decades before the Trump administration forbade using federal funding for research into the topic, Craig Ramey wondered if high-quality early education for Black children in North Carolina might improve their life outcomes.
Armed with a grant from the National Institutes of Health, Ramey established the Abecedarian Project at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. The study assigned infants, most of them Black, who had been born into low-income families between 1972 and 1977, to an intervention group that received full-time, high-quality child care from infancy through age 5. (The project name was drawn from an old-fashioned term meaning someone who is just learning their ABCs.)
In the 1960s and '70s, researchers lacked a full understanding of why children from disadvantaged backgrounds had developmental delays compared to their more advantaged peers, said Ramey, now 81 and a professor and researcher at Virginia Tech. "What I wanted to address is whether we could prevent that delay from occurring in the first place," he said.
The children in the intervention group received individualized prescriptions of educational activities and games that focused on social, emotional and cognitive areas of development, withe particular emphasis on language.
Researchers tracked the participants well into their mid-40s, comparing them to a control group that did not receive the services. Their latest findings, published last year in the Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, found different results for Black boys and Black girls who were enrolled in the program.
Both boys and girls in the early education intervention group showed significant gains through their elementary, middle and high school years. That finding matches that of other long-running early education research programs, such as the Perry Preschool Project, which tracked subjects in Ypsilanti, Michigan, from their toddler years into their 50s.
Related: Young children have unique needs and providing the right care can be a challenge. Our free early childhood education newsletter tracks the issues.
But the study also showed that while Black women continued to build on those cognitive gains into adulthood, the progress of Black men stalled out.
By their mid-40s, the students' cognitive outcomes were significantly different, with Black women continuing to gain in IQ, reading and math skills while Black males wound up scoring the same as those in the control group - their gains virtually erased.
"When boys hit adolescence they face some rocks in the road that are maybe different from what girls face," Ramey said.
The latest research looked only at results on cognitive measures; other research into the Abecedarian participants found long-lasting positive outcomes in other areas, such as health and social development.
What the Abecedarian Project showed, Ramey says, is that at-risk children don't have to enter the education system already further behind.
"We can change that and we can change it much more dramatically with much bigger and with longer-lasting results than anyone would have bet 30 years ago," he said. "In part that's due to a lot of our findings, and I'm proud of that."
But few, if any, programs have been able to successfully bridge that gender gap in long-term results. And now, many efforts to figure out how to support Black boys - or young Black children in general - are on the chopping block, as the Trump administration shuts down federal funding for research related to promoting educational equity.
Related: Sending your boy to preschool is great for your grandson, new research shows
Brian Wright, an associate professor and program coordinator for early education at the University of Memphis, said he has already had one research project canceled as a result of the Trump administration's sweeping elimination of federal grants and programs.
That project, which would have been funded by the National Science Foundation, was to be a longitudinal study following kindergarteners through third grade to better understand, through a racial equity lens, their access and participation in STEM classes. In late April, the Trump administration told the National Science Foundation to stop awarding new grants and funding existing ones.
In fact, few - if any - programs today provide low-income children of color with the level of support that the Abecedarian Project did.
"I've been from the West Coast to the East Coast, I've interviewed teachers and families and children all over the nation," said Wright. "I get asked often this question of can I identify programs that are exemplars. I'm usually not able to do that."
Wright's research has illuminated which elements are essential for such high-quality early education programs, starting with educators who have deep training in elevating and celebrating the culture, race and traditions of students of color, who create spaces for them to play, enjoy childhood and feel understood, and whose class libraries and lessons reflect students' own experiences and realities.
Related: Behind the findings of the Tennessee pre-K study that found negative effects for graduates
And for Black boys in particular, Wright said, these elements need to be paired with programs later in middle school and high school that preserve their childhood instead of rushing them through adolescence to prepare them for adulthood and the workforce.
The question, however, is how much more of that work can be done under the current administration.
Earlier this month, Wright and other policy experts and practitioners who focus on building high-quality education programs for students of color hosted a panel discussion at George Washington University to sound the alarm on the fact that not only is there a dearth of programs equipped to support Black boys, but federal officials are actively eliminating the best of those programs' practices.
"There are pockets where these things exist, but there's certainly more work that needs to be done," Wright says. "The fact that we can't name programs that are exemplars is telling that we have a lot of work to do."
This story about Black boys was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.
The post Five-decade study: Black girls build on preschool success, while Black boys struggle in some measures appeared first on The Hechinger Report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Silence on E. Coli outbreak highlights how Trump's changes undermine food safety
A magnification of E. coli. bacteria (Photo by Getty Images). Colton George felt sick. The 9-year-old Indiana boy told his parents his stomach hurt. He kept running to the bathroom and felt too ill to finish a basketball game. Days later, he lay in a hospital bed, fighting for his life. He had eaten tainted salad, according to a lawsuit against the lettuce grower filed by his parents on April 17 in federal court for the Southern District of Indiana. The E. coli bacteria that ravaged Colton's kidneys was a genetic match to the strain that killed one person and sickened nearly 90 people in 15 states last fall. Federal health agencies investigated the cases and linked them to a farm that grew romaine lettuce. But most people have never heard about this outbreak, which a Feb. 11 internal FDA memo linked to a single lettuce processor and ranch as the source of the contamination. In what many experts said was a break with common practice, officials never issued public communications after the investigation or identified the grower who produced the lettuce. From failing to publicize a major outbreak to scaling back safety alert specialists and rules, the Trump administration's anti-regulatory and cost-cutting push risks unraveling a critical system that helps ensure the safety of the U.S. food supply, according to consumer advocates, researchers and former employees at the FDA and U.S. Department of Agriculture. The investigation into the illnesses began near the end of the Biden administration but work on the lettuce outbreak wasn't completed until Feb. 11. At that time, the decision was made by the Trump administration not to release the names of the grower and processor because the FDA said no product remained on the market. The administration also has withdrawn a proposed regulation to reduce the presence of salmonella in raw poultry, according to an April USDA alert. It was projected to save more than $13 million annually by preventing more than 3,000 illnesses, according to the proposal. Officials from the Department of Health and Human Services have said that food safety is a priority, and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said in an April 29 interview with the newsletterInside Medicine that the recent job cuts would not affect agency operations. 'The FDA had 9,500 employees in 2007. Last year it was nearly 19,000. Has the 100% increase in employees increased approval times, innovation, AI, food safety, or agency morale?' Makary asked. 'No, it hasn't. In fact, it's increased regulatory creep.' The FDA referred questions to HHS, which declined to comment or make Makary available for an interview. In a statement, the agency said 'protecting public health and insuring food safety remain top priorities for HHS. FDA inspectors were not impacted [by job cuts] and this critical work will continue.' Public health advocates warn companies and growers will face less regulatory oversight and fewer consequences for selling tainted food products as a result of recent FDA actions. The administration is disbanding a Justice Department unit that pursues civil and criminal actions against companies that sell contaminated food and is reassigning its attorneys. Some work will be assumed by other divisions, according to a publicly posted memo from the head of the department's criminal division and a white paper by the law firm Gibson Dunn. The Justice Department did not respond to an email requesting comment. 'They need the DOJ to enforce the law,' said Sarah Sorscher, director of regulatory affairs at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group. 'For an executive investing in food safety, the knowledge they could go to jail if they don't is a really strong motivator.' Federal regulators also want states to conduct more inspections, according to two former FDA officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation. But some Democratic lawmakers say states lack the resources to take over most food safety inspections. 'Handing that duty to state and local agencies is really troubling,' said Rep. Shontel M. Brown, D-Ohio. 'They don't have the resources, and it creates a potentially unsafe situation that puts families in Ohio and America at risk.' Foodborne illnesses exact a major economic toll in the United States, according to federal data, and cost thousands of lives each year. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the deaths, chronic illness, medical treatment, and lost productivity from food-related illnesses amounted to $75 billion in 2023. Each year, about 48 million people in the U.S. get sick with foodborne illnesses, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In its first few months, the administration has suspended a program known as the Food Emergency Response Network Proficiency Testing that ensures food-testing labs accurately identify pathogens that can sicken or kill, according to a former FDA official. In March, the agency said it would delay from January 2026 to July 2028 compliance with a Biden-era rule that aims to speed up the identification and removal of potentially contaminated food from the market. However, the FDA is taking aim at foreign food manufacturing, saying in a May 6 notice that it would expand unannounced inspections overseas. 'This expanded approach marks a new era in FDA enforcement — stronger, smarter, and unapologetically in support of the public health and safety of Americans,' the notice said. Some former FDA and USDA officials said that goal isn't realistic, because U.S. inspectors often need to obtain travel visas that can wind up alerting companies to their arrival. 'It's really, really difficult to do surprise inspections,' said Brian Ronholm, director of food policy for Consumer Reports and a former USDA deputy undersecretary for food safety. 'The visa process can alert the local authority.' HHS declined to address Ronholm's concerns. The FDA hasn't met the mandated targets for inspecting food facilities in the U.S. since fiscal year 2018, and the agency has consistently fallen short of meeting its annual targets for foreign inspections, according to a January report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Foodborne illness can turn serious. Salmonella bacteria in cucumbers sickened dozens of people in April and May and left at least nine people hospitalized, according to the FDA. A 2008-09 salmonella outbreak in peanut butter killed nine, resulting in criminal charges against company executives. And E. coli in cookie dough sickened more than 70 people in 2009, including a Nevada mother who died of complications from eating the raw dough. E. coli, commonly found in feces, can be especially dangerous to children like Colton, the boy from Avon, Indiana, who ate contaminated lettuce. The bacteria can damage blood vessels and cause clots that destroy the kidneys, leading to strokes and comas. Consumers sickened by E. coli can pass it along to others, and, in some cases, the bacteria end up killing victims who never consumed the contaminated food. By the time Colton's mother brought him to the emergency room that November day, the bacteria were releasing toxins and damaging his blood cells and kidneys, according to his father, Chris George. Colton was sent to Riley Hospital for Children in Indianapolis. Chris said doctors told him and his wife, Amber George, that their son was in kidney failure and the next 24 to 72 hours would determine whether he would survive, the father recalled. 'They said it was life or death for our son, and I was like, wait, he was just playing basketball,' said Chris, a firefighter. 'I told them, 'You do what you need to do to save my son.'' Usually, the FDA alerts the public and identifies growers and food manufacturers when there are outbreaks like the one that sickened Colton. The FDA said in its February internal summary that the grower wasn't named because no product remained on the market. But Bill Marler, a Seattle lawyer who specializes in food-safety litigation and represents the George family, said the information is still important because it can prevent more cases, pressure growers to improve sanitation, and identify repeat offenders. It also gives victims an explanation for their illnesses and helps them determine whom they might take legal action against, he said. 'Normally we would see the information on their websites,' Marler said, adding that the agency's investigatory findings on the outbreak were 'all redacted' and he obtained them through a Freedom of Information Act request. The FDA, USDA, and CDC play central roles in overseeing food safety, including inspections and investigations. The FDA and CDC have been rocked by job cuts that are part of a reduction of 20,000 staff at HHS, their parent agency. The Agriculture Department has also shrunk its workforce. Staffing cuts mean delays in publicizing deadly outbreaks, said Susan Mayne, an adjunct professor at Yale School of Public Health who retired from the FDA in 2023. 'Consumers are being notified with delays about important food safety notifications,' she said, referring to a recent outbreak in cucumbers. 'People can die if there are pathogens like listeria, which can have a 30% fatality rate.' Makary has said the cuts wouldn't touch inspectors, reviewers, or scientists at the agency. But the FDA laid off scientists in April who worked at food safety labs in Chicago and San Francisco, where they performed specialized analysis for food inspectors, former FDA officials said. The FDA later restored some positions. 'No scientists were fired? That was incorrect,' Mayne said. Siobhan DeLancey, who worked in the agency's Office of Foods and Veterinary Medicine for more than 20 years before she also was laid off in April, said new requirements for reviewing agency announcements became so arduous that it took weeks to get approval for alerts that should have been going out much sooner. She said some employees who were laid off include communications specialists and web staff who do consumer outreach aimed at preventing illness. The USDA and FDA have been bringing some workers back or are asking some who accepted deferred resignations to take back their decisions. 'It's all about destruction and not about efficiency,' DeLancey said. 'We're going to see the effects for years. It will cost lives.' HHS did not respond to an email seeking a response to DeLancey's comments. For 13 days, Colton stayed on dialysis at the hospital, initially unable to eat or drink. His mother wet a sponge to moisten his lips and tongue. He turned 10 in the hospital. Chris George bought paint markers to make signs on the windows of his son's room. 'I am not happy with the CDC and FDA,' Chris George said. 'Victims have a right to know who made them sick. This is my kid. He's my life.' Colton was able to leave the hospital almost three weeks after first eating the contaminated lettuce but still has nightmares about the ordeal and is seeing a therapist. 'The whole 'Make America Healthy Again,' the focus on taking food color dyes out of cereal?' said Chris George, who objects to the Trump administration's decision to redact information about the grower in the February report. 'How about we take E. coli out of our lettuce, so it doesn't kill our kids?' KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Musk talks about Trump administration in CBS interview — despite asking to avoid the subject
Elon Musk offered his opinion on the Trump administration in an interview shortly after he departed from the White House, despite initially saying he only wanted to talk about 'spaceships,' rather than 'presidential policy.' In an interview with 'CBS Sunday Morning,' the former Trump adviser told CBS Correspondent David Pogue that he only wanted to talk about 'spaceships' when asked about the recent crackdown on foreign student visas, with Pogue mentioning Musk was one of those students at one time. 'I mean, I think we wanna stick to, you know, the subject of the day, which is, like, spaceships, as opposed to, you know, presidential policy,' Musk said. 'Oh, okay,' Pogue said. 'I was told anything is good, but-' 'No, well—no,' Musk replied. Pogue followed up by asking Musk about DOGE and its impact on Tesla, of which Musk is the CEO. Last month, Tesla reported a 71 percent drop in earnings before Musk announced he would be stepping back from DOGE. Musk said what was 'starting to happen' was a bit unfair,' adding that DOGE 'became the whipping boy for everything.' 'If there was some cut, real or imagined, everyone would blame DOGE,' he continued. 'I've had people think that, like, somehow, DOGE is gonna stop them from getting their Social Security check, which is completely untrue.' Musk added that he's a 'proponent of smaller government, not bigger government.' Musk, without being asked about the Trump administration, went on to say that 'it's not like I agree with everything the administration does.' 'I mean, I agree with much of what the administration does. But we have differences of opinion,' Musk continued. 'You know, there are things that I don't entirely agree with. But it's difficult for me to bring that up in an interview because then it creates a bone of contention. So then, I'm a little stuck in a bind, where I'm like, well, I don't wanna, you know, speak up against the administration, but I also don't wanna take responsibility for everything this administration's doing.' Musk left his role at the White House last week due to the time limit on his status as a special government employee expiring. Upon first entering his role in the White House, Musk talked grand ambitions of slashing federal spending and chipping away at the U.S. debt. However, after months of service, Musk has grown increasingly critical of the president's fiscal policies as his own efforts fell short.
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
There are more treatments than ever for hair loss in women. Experts weigh in
There's nothing quite like a good hair day, with that waterfall of shine befitting a Pantene commercial. But for the up to 40 per cent of females who experience thinning by age 50, those good hair days are harder to come by as we get older. A bit of shedding every day is part of a normal hair cycle, but if you start to see an increase in the amount of hair caught in your hairbrush, or you have a widening part, recessed temples or bald patches, it might be worth making an appointment. 'Most patients don't present to their doctor until they've lost about 50 per cent of their hair,' says Dr. Michael Brandt, a facial plastic surgeon and hair restoration specialist at Form Face + Body . 'They just don't notice it.' A dermatologist, specialized doctor or certified trichologist can help you find the cause of your loss and provide treatment options, usually topicals and medications followed by in-clinic therapies as necessary. Unfortunately, there is an element of trial and error with many hair loss treatments. 'Things like PRP and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) are second- or third-line options,' notes Caroline Ruggiero, IAT-certified trichologist and CEO of Truly You Hair & Scalp Clinic . 'Maybe they'll work, maybe they won't.' That's because the research on non-medical therapies often isn't as rigorous and may be funded by the companies creating the technology. Plus, they aren't subsidized by insurance. Many dermatology and trichology clinics still offer these solutions, though, because they can be very effective for some patients. Another issue with hair loss treatments is the lack of research in women compared to men — especially women with darker skin tones. 'I'm tired of companies studying their devices with Fitzpatrick skin types I to IV,' says dermatologist Dr. Rénee A. Beach, founder of DermAtelier on Avenue. 'Basically, they test on white people and maybe some East Asian people, not brown and Black people.' Despite these ongoing issues in the industry, there are a wide range of treatment options — if you're willing to commit. 'There are easily 20 types of female hair loss, each with subtypes,' says Beach, noting that different types have different causes. Generally speaking, these types of alopecia (the medical term for hair loss) are grouped into two categories: non-scarring and scarring. In non-scarring hair loss, the follicles are not destroyed and can potentially regrow hair: There are also several types of scarring alopecia, where the hair follicles are destroyed and replaced with scar tissue that prevents regrowth. The cause isn't always clear, but an autoimmune condition is often a factor. There are different types of scarring alopecia, in total affecting around three per cent of people with hair loss . Yes, in many cases — especially if you catch it early. But an accurate diagnosis is key. 'I guarantee that there are people walking around with very complex disorders who think they have telogen effluvium or female pattern hair loss,' says Ruggiero. 'Without knowing what's happening, you don't know which treatments will work.' To get a proper diagnosis, see a dermatologist or certified trichologist. Trichologists are not doctors, so they will have to work with your primary-care physician to order blood work or prescribe medications. Still, they can offer educated recommendations and may be easier to book than a dermatologist. According to new research , only 38 per cent of Ontario dermatologists are accepting OHIP referrals for hair loss. Once you have your diagnosis, it's best to try just one treatment at a time. That way, you'll be able to pinpoint what's behind any improvements or, in some cases, side effects. Keep in mind that most treatments take six months to show results (be wary of so-called quick fixes!) and may require lifelong upkeep. 'That's probably one of the most disappointing things that people hear when they come to see me,' says Beach. 'If you find something that works for you, expect to continue it indefinitely.' Often, medications are the first-line response for female pattern hair loss, because they're backed by robust research (albeit primarily in men), help to retain existing hair and are often affordable. Minoxidil, whether in a topical like Rogaine or in prescription pill form, is a popular treatment that dilates the blood vessels, allowing more blood to reach the hair follicles. The pill is cheaper than the topical version and, for many people, is more convenient than rubbing Rogaine on the scalp twice per day. There's also a category of medications called 5-alpha reductase inhibitors. They help to block a hormone called DHT from shrinking the hair follicles, which is a significant factor in female pattern hair loss and can be a problem for women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. These medications work for many people, but can come with side effects (breast tenderness, headaches and decreased sex drive) and are contraindicated for anyone who has had breast cancer or a first-degree relative (mom or sister) who has had breast cancer. They may also impact egg quality, so it's rare to prescribe this medication to premenopausal women who hope to conceive. In this age group, a hormone blocker like spironolactone may be an option. For alopecia areata, one of the most effective treatments is a class of medications called JAK inhibitors, which can help to reduce inflammation. However, it has side effects and isn't typically covered by insurance. The exorbitant cost? Around $20,000 per year. Procedures like PRP, microneedling, light therapy and transplants are commonly used as adjunct therapies to oral medication. However, if someone doesn't want to risk the side effects of medication or has a contraindication, they may be the first approach. What it is: Commonly used for androgenetic alopecia and telogen effluvium, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) can be injected into the scalp to stimulate hair follicles with growth factors spun from your own blood. Scalp Botox — yes, the wrinkle-freezer — is also a newer option for treating these types of hair loss by reducing inflammation and oil production while stimulating blood flow to the follicles. What's involved in treatment: For PRP or PRF, your provider will first draw a small amount of blood from your arm and place it in a centrifuge to separate out the plasma and/or fibrin, then draw that substance up into a syringe. Numbing cream can be used before injecting PRP, PRF or Botox to reduce discomfort, which can feel like a sharp pressure. You may experience bruising, itching, redness or swelling that lasts for a few days. How many treatments are needed: For PRP and PRF, three treatments spaced four to six weeks apart, then maintenance treatments every three or four months; for scalp Botox, just like getting it in your forehead or around your eyes — about every three to four months. How much does it cost: $600 to $1,200 per session (though there are often discounts for packages). What it is: This hair loss treatment involves puncturing the scalp with tiny needles to create microchannels, which attracts oxygenated blood to the surface. These pathways allow growth-enhancing topicals like PRP, exosomes (derived from stem cells or placenta cells), or customized serums to better penetrate. There is also new regenerative technology out of Canada's own Acorn Biolabs that uses stem cells processed from 50 of your hair follicles to create a personalized secretome serum for application after microneedling. For all types of microneedling, the provider will apply an anesthetic cream to numb the area, then they'll create micro-injuries in the scalp with a dermaroller or dermapen — hand-held devices with tiny needles. You may experience some mild discomfort. Next, it's time for the chosen topical treatment, which will need to stay on for 12 or more hours. You'll be able to resume normal activities in a day or two, and may experience some redness and swelling for a couple days. How many treatments are needed: Three treatments spaced four to six weeks apart, then maintenance treatments every three or four months. How much does it cost: $500 to $1,000 per session with discounts on packages. For microneedling with a secretome serum, there's also a one-time cost of about $5,000 for stem cell collection and the production of 12 vials of serum. What it is: A device like the Alma TED uses ultrasound waves and air pressure to improve blood flow and absorption of a hair serum containing growth factors and peptides. What's involved in treatment: Your provider will apply the serum to your scalp, then will move a hand-held device over your head. It's painless and with no downtime but you'll have to leave the serum on your head for 24 hours. How many treatments are needed: Four treatments spaced one month apart, then maintenance treatments every four to six months. How much does it cost: $800 to $1,200 per session with discounts on packages. What it is: The most common laser for hair loss right now is low-level laser therapy (LLLT). It uses diffused red and near-infrared light to increase blood flow and stimulate the hair follicles. Some people — typically with short, straight hair — have good results, while others don't see a difference. On the more aggressive side of the laser spectrum, Health Canada recently cleared a non-ablative fractional laser called FoLix . It promises to stimulate hair growth by creating micro-wounds in the scalp with its tiny beams of energy, though its adoption into Canadian clinics hasn't picked up steam yet. What's involved in treatment: LLLT and FoLix each take about 30 minutes per treatment and are generally pain-free with no downtime. For LLLT, you sit with a helmet on your head and can read a book or scroll your phone. For FoLix, you lie down and your provider moves a hand-held device over your scalp, using the laser to target thinning areas. How many treatments are needed: Two to three weekly LLLT treatments for four to six weeks, then maintenance treatments every week; monthly FoLix treatments for four to six months. How much does it cost: $70 to $150 per LLLT treatment, with discounts on packages (some people choose to buy their own device [$1,500 to $5,000] if LLLT works for them); expect FoLix to ring in significantly higher per treatment. What it is: A hair transplant removes follicles from one area of the scalp (often the back of the head where hair is thicker or hair loss is less noticeable) and implants them in another. 'If there's global thinning, a hair transplant is not the answer,' notes Brandt. For candidates that have enough transplantable hair for the procedure, the follicles are traditionally harvested and implanted manually, but new technology is changing the process — and results. For example, the Artas iXi Robotic Hair Restoration system uses a robotic arm, multiple high-tech cameras and AI to improve the rate of successful transfer from 80 per cent in skilled human hands to more than 90 per cent. What's involved in treatment: Small strips of your hair are shaved at the back of your head so that the robot (or your provider) can access the follicles in the area. For women with long hair, these strips usually can't be noticed. As you lie face down, the follicles are then grafted with a scalpel, needle, or the Artas iXi, which acts kind of like a hole punch to harvest the follicles over the course of three hours. After a short break, the grafts are reinserted into the scalp's thinned-out areas, one by one. Altogether, the procedure takes six to 10 hours and nerve blocks and Ativan are used to manage pain and anxiety. After two weeks, the donor area should be fully healed, but it takes at least a year to see the full results. How many treatments are needed: One, in most cases (however, hair loss tends to be progressive and will likely continue with age). How much does it cost: $8,000 to $15,000 on average, depending on how many follicles are harvested. Recently, there's been a scalp-care boom, popularizing new serums, shampoos and conditioners designed to hydrate the scalp and strengthen hair roots to help minimize shedding. Some lean on peptides and antioxidants like you'd find in skin care, while others use ingredients like Aminexil, which is chemically similar to the tried-and-true minoxidil. You've likely also spotted caffeine-spiked serums and scalp massage tools, both designed to stimulate blood flow to hair follicles. For Ruggeiro and Beach, these products are fine complements to a treatment plan, but the pros note that there's a lack of third-party research to support the effectiveness. 'I don't think there's anything wrong with treating scalp care like skin care, but if you have a serious condition, disorder of the scalp, progressive form of hair loss or autoimmune form of hair loss, you need proper diagnosis and treatment,' says Ruggeiro. Maintaining existing hair is easier than growing new hair, so it's always a good idea to take care of your mane — just don't expect a miracle shampoo to overdeliver, says Beach. 'I don't have a problem with people using shampoos that they think are helpful, but how long do you leave your shampoo on your head? A minuscule amount of time. I have Afro-textured hair and wash it once a week. How am I going to expect a shampoo alone to stop hair thinning? The math doesn't math.' Maintenance is crucial for good long-term results. That means that the best hair restoration treatment is the one you can afford and are willing to stick with forever. 'If you have unlimited time and money, you could probably layer all of these treatments,' says Ruggiero. 'But if you can't spend $20,000 or $30,000 on your hair every year, then don't start.' Instead, pick one or two therapies — say, oral medication and PRF injections three times per year — and stick with them. For female pattern hair loss, you'll often want to start with topicals and medications. Then, if you're not satisfied with your results or don't want to take medication, you might consider PRP with or without microneedling as the next step. If you have telogen effluvium, finding and resolving the trigger is essential. That may mean changing your diet, working to minimize stress, correcting thyroid concerns or waiting out the postpartum period. To jump-start the hair growth phase, you can try PRP, microneedling, ultrasound or lasers — but you first need to treat the underlying cause of your hair loss or you're wasting your time and money.
