Bayer Prolactin Receptor Antibody For Male And Female Pattern Hair Loss

[John Difool]

Since it will take a while and many of us do not have time we could concentrate on a megathread in which to connect searches and look for the pathways in which prolactin is involved, maybe we understand something more and find an alternative compound to smi that can give us more time for the antibody to be unavailable (assuming it will be)

Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?

 

[John Difool]

re: SMI - even the HMI patent references research that shows the high unlikelihood that conventional PRLR antagonists can work similarly…

can you outline the paragraph it says that?

 

[John Difool]

But if you’ve already crossed the Rubicon by using estrogens (implying you’ve tried everything with good scientific support and are now looking beyond that)…then sure

I wouldn't put HRT beyond science.

 

[Otrebor]

Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?

Having studies available is not so obvious.

obviously I am not under the illusion that something can come out of this forum before the researchers get there, I just say that many research threads are very interesting and broaden the vision, it does not detract from the fact that afterwards we can get to use compounds in a more conscious way.

an investigation and discussion thread that manages to link all the most interesting researches that are posted would not be bad at all, I'm just proposing

 

[John Difool]

Having studies available is not so obvious.

obviously I am not under the illusion that something can come out of this forum before the researchers get there, I just say that many research threads are very interesting and broaden the vision, it does not detract from the fact that afterwards we can get to use compounds in a more conscious way.

an investigation and discussion thread that manages to link all the most interesting researches that are posted would not be bad at all, I'm just proposing

Coming into 2022, there is no problems getting studies on anything for free on the Internet. If it's published and peer reviewed, it can be accessed and discussed already. This is actually another powerful weapon in this community to constantly sleuth for new studies on cancer related drugs benefiting hair loss and post them in the "New Research, Studies, and Technologies", this very same section you are posting in.

So, I am not sure how new you are here, but posting links on research is already happening already. Your "magathread" is already the section of the forum (except for the occasional deranged posts from a minority of people.) What more do you need?

PS: I don't know why I am replying in a GB thread. Sorry OP. Maybe you should create your own thread to discuss this if you have further comments.

 

[-specter-]

I came up roughly with the same landing date: 2025. You will probably get a more impressive regrowth if your HF don't continue to be damaged in the interim.

how can we preserve the hf before it comes out? I am using the famous big 3 and the microneedler

 

[John Difool]

Y

page 3 of the patent:

thanks. there is nothing new here. these are the limitations of SMI vs HMI and the people using SMI know those too.

 

[John Difool]

how can we preserve the hf before it comes out? I am using the famous big 3 and the microneedler

At least, what you are doing is more than most people are doing here. If you are interested to jump on topical I posted my suggestions in the ARV-110 gb thread:

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/group-buy-arv-110-protac-way-200070-erb-agonist.134445/post-2030393

 

[Chads don't bald]

At least, what you are doing is more than most people are doing here. If you are interested to jump on topical I posted my suggestions in the ARV-110 gb thread:

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/group-buy-arv-110-protac-way-200070-erb-agonist.134445/post-2030393

You think oral finasteride is enough for preservation in the meantime?

 

[jan_miezda]

if merely paraphrasing the original researchers' own doubts and uncertainties about metabolism and dosing is "killing it in the nest"...
then the idea was kind of dead on arrival

anybody that disagrees can still just grab a few people to try it out

a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be

and then if they wanted to do a service to the community beyond trying to grow their own hair, they could share their journals/logging/analysis of their group experiment

“a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be”

until the half life, volume of distribution , clearance rate and AUC of SMI are not known .. any administration of it is just a shot in the dark and very unlikely to work . Even if smi has therapeutic proprieties for Androgenetic Alopecia it’s useless to try without knowing those things and why clinical trials are important

 

[John Difool]

Right, some people were aware of these issues and hoped that SMI overcomes them
(edit: I do question how many of the participants actually were aware of this, given the attempts in this thread to chill discussion)

Not saying that's dumb, I just don't see how that's likely in the absence of dosage and pk information unless explicitly accounted for in a group experiment...

These quotes demonstrate that you're effectively taking the uncertainties of one preclinical drug (HMI) and multiplying them by those of another preclinical drug (SMI):
-"future structural modifications of SMI-6 should be undertaken so as to increase its therapeutic window"
-"This report represents an early pre-clinical phase"
-"should be further optimized and improved before it can be considered as therapeutics"
-"a more complete characterization of the pharmacodynamics and metabolic stability of SMI-6"
-"a determination of its oral deliverability"
-"resolution of the exact mechanism which governs the PRLR independent anti-tumorigenic action of SMI-6"

That doesn't sound unusual from an early drug. I am personally on 3 drugs that have this limitation today. People from this forum experimenting with those today is again, the true value of this community. Of mice and men. We won't let the rodents have it only if it has potential on us too. We just want to know earlier than the labs can move things. Bravo people.

 

[John Difool]

You think oral finasteride is enough for preservation in the meantime?

that's a very loaded question.Some folks who start balding can stay nw0 for at least a decade on it. So yes, it's possible. Or minoxidil, or both or the big 3, etc. It all depends how your hair loss is aggressive and when you are catching up with it. There are no miracles today. Some people are forced to use heavier weapons to fight Androgenetic Alopecia.

Deal with future hair treatment and its promises the same way as you are anticipating the release of a movie you enjoyed the story in writing: don't set your expectations too high, so you save yourself from being disappointed.

 

[John Difool]

(although somehow there are people with routines like RU + E2 on this site...always wondered what got them there)

Even if anecdotal, the regrowth of hair on HRT is quite impressive. HRT has become the Hollywood of hair treatment and going that road for hair dysphoria is of course a big commitment similar to gender dysphoria. Except that the sides you get are undesirable and hard to overcome if you do it just for your hair only. Cis men would prefer to look more like Fabio than Caitlyn Jenner.

Similar to finasteride and Duta, these same folks are trying to take the unwanted feminization out of HRT by going topical therefore hoping E2 to be as effective without any visible or sexual sides. Just the hair baby! What is not well understood is that the blood serum level of E2 needed for growing hair doesn't necessarily end up being the equivalent as to what is needed on your scalp to accomplish the same. More trials will help figure this one. I am interested about the trend of micro-dosing E2 that some folks are trying on this forum using the goldilocks principle.

Today, based on anecdotal evidences and my own experience, I would not recommend E2 topical because it seems to not work that great after all, or at least till we understand the dose that works best on the scalp. On the other hand, E3 has promoted regrowth without much sides. This would be my choice as a cis.

 

[John Difool]

Er, I am not recommending E2 topical at this time. I am recommending E3 topical. Not sure what part of my post you missed. HRT E2 pills and injections sure why not, but you have to know what you are doing and what you will get.

Can you please re-read what I wrote?

PS: I noticed you are always replying to people in a way that shows you didn't read carefully what they wrote before and playing with the ambiguities to make things even more confusing. Can you please try to stop that? It is irritating and doesn't bring you in a positive light.

 

[John Difool]

And what are you doing to save their hair? bashing everything under the sun but broccoli sprouts? It's getting slightly tiresome. I am starting to feel that reading @bluecyclone posts wasn't that bad actually.

 

[John Difool]

it says that on your regimen: oral min, topical min + tretinoin, dermarolling, stemoxydine, Ketoconazole shampoo, topical sulforaphane, oral NAC

So I can understand your posts better now.

Are you using the 1.2g NAC dosage from that study?

 

[jan_miezda]

for group testing of any other non-androgenic pathway treatments, I'd normally agree

but a DIY experiment with HMI (and thus SMI) has completely different starting priors that make it much easier than testing e.g. SM0554:
1. can grow hair in completely bald areas
2. strong effect timeframe is 3-6 months
3. works in almost everyone
4. no obvious notable safety concerns

under those assumptions, even a single person should be able to make a guess at a starting oral/topical/injection dosage and keep escalating it every few months, periodically checking to see if their temples actually grow any new terminal hairs...

and with 20 people and 12 months (changing doses every 2 months) you could test out 100+ different dosages and see if even a single person who's maxed out on other treatments grows hair, to confirm that SMI works...

and if 12 months goes by and nobody has results, assume it doesn't work

that just sounds so costly for the small chance of it working

 

[John Difool]

agreed yeah, under more realistic assumptions it's an obvious pass

but using their listed assumptions, it could be a reasonable thing to try...

and then their logic quickly stops making sense again - why go to all the trouble of buying it and then put near zero effort into testing it?
to the point of literally not even trying to track how many people are using SMI? wtf

Don't worry Charlie, there are still people in the group that you joined and left, testing SMI right now, just for you to know if it works or not one day. So you can add it to your NAC and sulforaphane topical.

Even if you blasted this thing with so much negativity, that didn't deter some people to pursue the program. And people who decided to put their own money in and take the risk unlike you lazy bunch who sit in this forum leeching away what is coming out of the community. They didn't listen to your rants and diatribes. Isn't it amazing? So hang on in here, keep posting your prognosis, sit back and relax.

 

[pegasus2]

it's not "lazy" to avoid using something you don't think works
it's not "leeching" to need better evidence of something
taking an unnecessary "risk" has no virtue

that you view pretty soft criticism in a research thread as some kind of a threat worth neutralizing is kind of sad
nobody is stopping you from trying SMI, eat as much as you want

Nobody has a problem with criticism, it's your adversarial, grating personality that people can't stand.There's a reason you don't have any friends, you should think about that. Everybody knows the standard treatments work. This is the new research section where we look for things that could be added to those to make them work better. Not everyone is capable of getting regrowth on the standard treatments alone, I don't know why that's so hard to understand. I had a lot of success adding additional treatments to my regimen, more than when using only the standard treatments. You're not smarter than anyone else because the big 3 work for you. You're just lucky that your hair loss isn't as severe as others and/or resistant to treatment. You've never presented any new research here that we can learn from, all you do is present information that everyone already knows. I think you're in the wrong section of the forum. You're not here to offer insight and constructive criticism, you're only here to be toxic and condescending. Just go away, nothing you say is valuable and no one likes you here or in the real world

 

[corkmeister]

it's not "lazy" to avoid using something you don't think works
it's not "leeching" to need better evidence of something
taking an unnecessary "risk" has no virtue

that you view pretty soft criticism in a research thread as some kind of a threat worth neutralizing is kind of sad
nobody is stopping you from trying SMI, eat as much as you want

My friend, I mean this in the nicest possible way, but I see you in every thread and every discord posting elaborate analyses why you think whatever's being tried/discussed won't work, or what people should be doing differently. There's nothing wrong with skepticism, it's good to be critical, but the way in which you're doing it just rubs people the wrong way. Just my 2 cents.