BRYAN RU VS spironolactone
- Thread starter tinytim30
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 42
tinytim30 said:
I'm a little confused by what you're asking! The title of this thread says "BRYAN RU VS spironolactone", but your sentence above refers specifically to "rum58841". Which of those two drugs (regular RU58841, or the "rum" version of RU58841) are you speaking about? I've never used either of those versions of RU58841 (or topical dutasteride, for that matter), although I've certainly used versions of topical spironolactone. I think it's fairly clear that topical spironolactone isn't as effective as RU58841 (not sure about the "rum" version), but as far as I know, there's nothing I've ever seen in medical journals about the use of topical dutasteride.
ok is ru58841 and rum would you say both as affective?and is there any reason why you have not tried ru? is there a safety issue with these experimental treatments?and if you use ru or rum you would need to use some form of regrowth product such as minoxidil.
Another thing what about minoxidil vs L oreals aminexil?
Another thing what about minoxidil vs L oreals aminexil?
- Reaction score
- 42
tinytim30 said:
Don't know for sure. You and I have probably both seen the study on the "rum" version of RU58841 which has been posted by some of those other guys on this site (the ones who are busy getting access to it). The study they presented appeared to make it seem like it's good stuff, but it would be nice see some additional studies on it!
tinytim30 said:
I personally haven't used it for two different reasons:
1) When I was trying various different things for my hair a few years ago, RU58841 was just too expensive for me. Too expensive, and too difficult to obtain.
2) The only access I had to it at that time was from the Chinese companies that everybody talks about nowadays, and I was nervous (make that VERY nervous!) that I could trust those companies to produce a chemical which I was going to be putting on my head every day! What if those companies weren't very careful about their methods? What if there were dangerous IMPURITIES in their versions of RU58841 (the chemical synthesis of RU58841 uses phosgene, by the way). Obviously, I wouldn't have much legal recourse, if any really bad things happened in a company in China, for God's sake!
tinytim30 said:
It might help, but I would consider the antiandrogenic effect of the RU58841 to be the most important thing.
tinytim30 said:
A few years ago, a really excellent review article was written by Drs. Sawaya and Shapiro, who gave their opinions on a great many substances which hadn't been officially approved by the FDA for treating hair loss. One of the things they reviewed was "aminexil", and they spoke about it rather harshly and critically (I can tell you exactly what they said, if you want me to find it for you). They said it needed to be tested in ways that were similar to how companies have tested topical minoxidil; they seemed to find it too difficult to believe the alleged claims about aminexil.
Jacob
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 44
I have too much other stuff to use up before I try anything experimental like that..but I am watching for feedback/results.
Any decent LLLT helmet-type device can help As we all know..it also doesn't live up to the hype that has been thrown around the past # of years. I can't see myself using such a device unless it's the Laser Cap- http://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=59467 or something similar.
Next they'll be hyping the dermarollers..even though ppl have been using them for years.
BTW..did I read above Bryan saying he was experimenting with some things a few years ago? Why???..when Prox is the OBVIOUS thing to use?? I thought for years and years he didn't care about his hair loss anyway...? :dunno: :shock: :shakehead:
Any decent LLLT helmet-type device can help As we all know..it also doesn't live up to the hype that has been thrown around the past # of years. I can't see myself using such a device unless it's the Laser Cap- http://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=59467 or something similar.
Next they'll be hyping the dermarollers..even though ppl have been using them for years.
BTW..did I read above Bryan saying he was experimenting with some things a few years ago? Why???..when Prox is the OBVIOUS thing to use?? I thought for years and years he didn't care about his hair loss anyway...? :dunno: :shock: :shakehead:
have you been to alopecia uk forum as i would like some help i have said that sodium lauryl sulphates in shampoos and other things may cause cancer or a toxic affect when added to other products as i do not like sls and only use sls free products.
But i am surprised that bryan has not tried rum as he says it maybe quite good i know he says its expensive but the money i have wasted on things that do not work it would be cheap if it regrew some hair.
But i am surprised that bryan has not tried rum as he says it maybe quite good i know he says its expensive but the money i have wasted on things that do not work it would be cheap if it regrew some hair.
- Reaction score
- 42
Jacob said:
Proxiphen is certainly an obvious thing to use, but it's not the ONLY obvious thing to use. For a long time, I've also been extremely interested in the use of topical antiandrogens, especially RU58841.
Jacob said:
A few years ago, I cared a lot more about my hair loss than I do now. I still do have a purely academic interest in it, though.
Jacob
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 44
So now it's- up until a few years ago. All that time..since those lame before/afters 15+ years ago...you didn't use the products that are the OBVIOUS choice. Oh wait..I posted about a post you made saying you used Proxiphen after those before/afters. Proxiphen isn't the ONLY obvious thing to use..yet it's the ONLY thing you constantly, for 15+ years..push. The more things change..the more things...change.
It's ok Bryan, the stuff hasn't worked as claimed for anyone else, either :woot:
It's ok Bryan, the stuff hasn't worked as claimed for anyone else, either :woot:
RE Ru58841 does this work the same as the rum myristate? and also in the stump tail monkey trials did they use a 5% cream and does this not work better delivery than say a lotion base.
They say a liposome cream is that right and how would you be able to mix that properly at home? and what cream base would you need to buy to make it.
How much ru in grams to add to a cream base for 5%? for a 7 day application how many grams cream?
Sorry for all the questions but i want to make a solution like the guy john used in the hairlosshelp pics.
They say a liposome cream is that right and how would you be able to mix that properly at home? and what cream base would you need to buy to make it.
How much ru in grams to add to a cream base for 5%? for a 7 day application how many grams cream?
Sorry for all the questions but i want to make a solution like the guy john used in the hairlosshelp pics.
- Reaction score
- 42
tinytim30 said:
They ought to end-up working in a similar fashion, but if the study is correct, the "rum" version of RU58841 should be even better.
tinytim30 said:
They used typical, standard solutions of RU58841 in alcohol and propylene glycol. And maybe water. I'm not aware of any stumptailed macaque trials that used RU58841 in "cream" or "lotion" bases.
tinytim30 said:
The poster "Jacob" is big on liposomes. Ask him to comment on that!
tinytim30 said:
How much RU58841 are you going to apply every day? :dunno:
many thanks bryan would you say 3mls a day and 50mg amount? there is a guy on you tube vid that has instructions to make cream and a lotion as he says the cream is ok for hairline, have you seen the ru video? and jacob what about the liposome way of making a cream how to?