Chances That finasteride + minoxidil Works Forever

[BaldyBalderBald]

i am afraid that duta is an obligation for aggresive hairloss

Not necesseraly, i've began to notice hairloss at the age of 15, pretty rough and agressive, like 50+ hairs on my pillow every damn morning, changing sheets daily to check if this was regular, it was...

Visit some top derm in South of France, including one doing worldwide conference who puts me right away on minoxidil, saying too young for finasteride obviously.

minoxidil 5% was a disaster personaly, for three years, itchy and red scalp, lots of dandruff, and low efficacity.

By the age of 18, switched to finasteride 1m/d.

A friend of mine began to loose it at the exact same age, he did nothing, no minoxidil, no finasteride, only available treatment in 2001.

Anyway, he had a Norwood 7 be the age of 18 (true story), very agressive, like mine, he shaved his head before graduated to high school.
My dad was Norwood 7 at 22, no options back then.

Been stable for 13 years, now 31, but it seems less potent, dry itchy scalp again and poor hair quality, hairline is receiding again.

Bottom line is, everyone is different with those treatments, try finasteride and minoxidil for a solid year and stay on it, it can work for agressive pattern, if you get sides or if it don't work...well i'll stay away from Duta imo

Good luck on this journey

 

[soo]

Not necesseraly, i've began to notice hairloss at the age of 15, pretty rough and agressive, like 50+ hairs on my pillow every damn morning, changing sheets daily to check if this was regular, it was...

Visit some top derm in South of France, including one doing worldwide conference who puts me right away on minoxidil, saying too young for finasteride obviously.

minoxidil 5% was a disaster personaly, for three years, itchy and red scalp, lots of dandruff, and low efficacity.

By the age of 18, switched to finasteride 1m/d.

A friend of mine began to loose it at the exact same age, he did nothing, no minoxidil, no finasteride, only available treatment in 2001.

Anyway, he had a Norwood 7 be the age of 18 (true story), very agressive, like mine, he shaved his head before graduated to high school.
My dad was Norwood 7 at 22, no options back then.

Been stable for 13 years, now 31, but it seems less potent, dry itchy scalp again and poor hair quality, hairline is receiding again.

Bottom line is, everyone is different with those treatments, try finasteride and minoxidil for a solid year and stay on it, it can work for agressive pattern, if you get sides or if it don't work...well i'll stay away from Duta imo

Good luck on this journey

Is your hair receiding at the same speed as when it started with 15 or very slow? If it's slow then why not using a hair transplant to dense it up? That would buy you a lot of time.
-----------

What I can definitely tell after some discussions with my dermatologist (he thinks the same):

1. Rossi et al. shows that there is a 86% chance that you will keep it for 10 years
2. After 1 year you can tell if you're a responder or not. If yes, there's just a 4% chance that it'll get worse for the next 9 years (because 1 out of 10 doesn't usually respond at all, and that's not you in this case)
3. There is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years, on the contrary there's a heavy tendency that your hair will be the same even after 15-20 years, we are just waiting for more studies to finally prove it (my dermatologist has 12 more patients with great hair and 15+ years of finasteride-using, just one started decreasing)
4. If you add minoxidil, respond well to it and don't belong to those 4%, then you should be able to definitely keep it for 15 years at least, because it has a synergetic effect with finasteride ==> finasteride keeps the additional hair from minoxidil ==> considering the fact that minoxidil alone should buy you at least 3 more years thanks to the additional hair, just try to imagine what finasteride will do with the 10+ years-protection to the additional hair you get from minoxidil
5. There's RU, there's topical spironolactone, there are Keto-Shampoos, there's Duta ==> no matter how small the effect of those are, combining them with finasteride will give you even more bonus due to the synergising (just my opinion, this one I didn't ask my dermat.)
6. Something for nearly 100% lifelong maintenance will be out by <15 years for sure, hell even I think that 2018-2020 will be a gamechanger, call me naive or whatever. There's not one intercytex promising vague stoff over years but 3-4 very promising things in their endstage (Tsuji, Shiseido, Brotzu, Follica) - that has never be the case so far

I asked many people if I sound overly optimistic. I'm not, that's the way it should go when you're not a rare unlucky case.

Why am I writing this whole sh*t? My hair looks great now, dense enough after 3 months of finasteride and with minoxidil it now looks better than in my "prime". Norwood 0. I want assurance for my hair, a goddamn inner feeling of security that it stays the way it is and get rid of this fear loosing it - at all! Not just for me, but for everyone who's a good responder to finasteride after a year and finds out that it's the same for minoxidil. Because then you can assume that just 4% are lying between a baldhead and you with great hair, even when they put you in your damn coffin.

 

[yayapapaya]

minoxidil loses potency after 2 years, have to constantly up the concentration.

 

[INT]

Is your hair receiding at the same speed as when it started with 15 or very slow? If it's slow then why not using a hair transplant to dense it up? That would buy you a lot of time.
-----------



I asked many people if I sound overly optimistic. I'm not, that's the way it should go when you're not a rare unlucky case.

Yes, you are overly optimistic. If this would be an accurate representation of our reality as balders you would not find as many people in this subforum my friend...

 

[soo]

Yes, you are overly optimistic. If this would be an accurate representation of our reality as balders you would not find as many people in this subforum my friend...

So where am I wrong? Point out the things that are false

This subforum is an accumulation of people with a majority of non/bad responders (but considering the responders just a minority) telling you that there's no hope and searching for other things. From 26 votes so far nearly one third believes that minoxidil+finasteride won't help for even 10 years, even though Rossi et al. proves the exact opposite. Go to a nazi pub, tell them why jews have a right to live and wait for the laughter.. analyse your surroundings before judging your own opinions.

 

[kiwipilu]

minoxidil loses potency after 2 years, have to constantly up the concentration.

yet it helps for good pgd2/pge2 balance . See follica next compound ...

 

[ALightInTheDark]

minoxidil loses potency after 2 years, have to constantly up the concentration.

Minoxidil sulpho- transferase converts minoxidil to minoxidil sulfate if I recall well. minoxidil Sulfate is actually 14x better than Minoxidil
If effiency is lost it's maybe coz of lack of MST through the time. So concentration has nothing to do with this. Just get minoxidil sulfate and make new batchs everyday coz minoxidil Sulfate transform into minoxidil very quickly.

 

[INT]

So where am I wrong? Point out the things that are false

This subforum is an accumulation of people with a majority of non/bad responders (but considering the responders just a minority) telling you that there's no hope and searching for other things. From 26 votes so far nearly one third believes that minoxidil+finasteride won't help for even 10 years, even though Rossi et al. proves the exact opposite. Go to a nazi pub, tell them why jews have a right to live and wait for the laughter.. analyse your surroundings before judging your own opinions.

Ok.

First of all... do you have the complete study of Rossi et al. for me? I find it hard to give opinions on just an abstract. If you cannot find it I will gave over the limitations of what I can read so far in my next post, If you CAN find it I will read the entire study and then give my opinion. For the sake of the quality of the discussion I will for now only respond on your comments that are not related to this study.


"2. After 1 year you can tell if you're a responder or not. If yes, there's just a 4% chance that it'll get worse for the next 9 years (because 1 out of 10 doesn't usually respond at all, and that's not you in this case)"

- Please provide a source for these claims, preferably quote the exact part ot the study where this is stated.

3. There is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years, on the contrary there's a heavy tendency that your hair will be the same even after 15-20 years, we are just waiting for more studies to finally prove it (my dermatologist has 12 more patients with great hair and 15+ years of finasteride-using, just one started decreasing)

- Just because there is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years does not mean anything. The fact that there is no reason for it means that science is not far enough to provide an answer for it. We are waiting for studies to prove it? This shows how not objective you are. You are basically saying 'I really think it is the case, even though there is no real proof but I believe in it that much that I am 100% that science will agree with me at some point, just wait!'.

"(my dermatologist has 12 more patients with great hair and 15+ years of finasteride-using, just one started decreasing)"


- The plural of anecdote is not evidence. And besides, my dermatologist actually uses finasteride himself and had never heard of side effects and here I am, more than one year later after quiting finasteride, still not recovered... What I am trying to say is, dermatologists should be experts in the topic, but more often than you would think they are not unfortunately.


4. "If you add minoxidil, respond well to it and don't belong to those 4%, then you should be able to definitely keep it for 15 years at least, because it has a synergetic effect with finasteride"

- You have data to back these numbers up?

"6. Something for nearly 100% lifelong maintenance will be out by <15 years for sure, hell even I think that 2018-2020 will be a gamechanger, call me naive or whatever. There's not one intercytex promising vague stoff over years but 3-4 very promising things in their endstage (Tsuji, Shiseido, Brotzu, Follica) - that has never be the case so far"

I truly hope you are right but it is just speculation so far.


"Why am I writing this whole sh*t? My hair looks great now, dense enough after 3 months of finasteride and with minoxidil it now looks better than in my "prime". Norwood 0. I want assurance for my hair, a goddamn inner feeling of security that it stays the way it is and get rid of this fear loosing it - at all! Not just for me, but for everyone who's a good responder to finasteride after a year and finds out that it's the same for minoxidil. Because then you can assume that just 4% are lying between a baldhead and you with great hair, even when they put you in your damn coffin."

Great that your hair is doing well! As you can see I bolded a certain part of the last part of your previous post because this tells me all I need to know. You want assurance for your hair and you desperately look for an inner feeling of security. I can relate to that feeling but it makes us no longer objective. You cherry-picked information, anecdotes and data to create a reality that you feel comfortable with. You had hoped that other people would give that feeling to you (that is why you created this topic after all) but the results were not really what you were looking for so you started doing the work yourself. It seems like you are quite confident now about the success of our current treatments so good job on that.

However I feel it is my duty, as someone that has been here for quite some time now, that telling new yous such as yourself, that ignoring reality often leads to suffering in the long run.

 

[wintop6211]

Ok.

First of all... do you have the complete study of Rossi et al. for me? I find it hard to give opinions on just an abstract. If you cannot find it I will gave over the limitations of what I can read so far in my next post, If you CAN find it I will read the entire study and then give my opinion. For the sake of the quality of the discussion I will for now only respond on your comments that are not related to this study.


"2. After 1 year you can tell if you're a responder or not. If yes, there's just a 4% chance that it'll get worse for the next 9 years (because 1 out of 10 doesn't usually respond at all, and that's not you in this case)"

- Please provide a source for these claims, preferably quote the exact part ot the study where this is stated.

3. There is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years, on the contrary there's a heavy tendency that your hair will be the same even after 15-20 years, we are just waiting for more studies to finally prove it (my dermatologist has 12 more patients with great hair and 15+ years of finasteride-using, just one started decreasing)

- Just because there is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years does not mean anything. The fact that there is no reason for it means that science is not far enough to provide an answer for it. We are waiting for studies to prove it? This shows how not objective you are. You are basically saying 'I really think it is the case, even though there is no real proof but I believe in it that much that I am 100% that science will agree with me at some point, just wait!'.

"(my dermatologist has 12 more patients with great hair and 15+ years of finasteride-using, just one started decreasing)"


- The plural of anecdote is not evidence. And besides, my dermatologist actually uses finasteride himself and had never heard of side effects and here I am, more than one year later after quiting finasteride, still not recovered... What I am trying to say is, dermatologists should be experts in the topic, but more often than you would think they are not unfortunately.


4. "If you add minoxidil, respond well to it and don't belong to those 4%, then you should be able to definitely keep it for 15 years at least, because it has a synergetic effect with finasteride"

- You have data to back these numbers up?

"6. Something for nearly 100% lifelong maintenance will be out by <15 years for sure, hell even I think that 2018-2020 will be a gamechanger, call me naive or whatever. There's not one intercytex promising vague stoff over years but 3-4 very promising things in their endstage (Tsuji, Shiseido, Brotzu, Follica) - that has never be the case so far"

I truly hope you are right but it is just speculation so far.


"Why am I writing this whole sh*t? My hair looks great now, dense enough after 3 months of finasteride and with minoxidil it now looks better than in my "prime". Norwood 0. I want assurance for my hair, a goddamn inner feeling of security that it stays the way it is and get rid of this fear loosing it - at all! Not just for me, but for everyone who's a good responder to finasteride after a year and finds out that it's the same for minoxidil. Because then you can assume that just 4% are lying between a baldhead and you with great hair, even when they put you in your damn coffin."

Great that your hair is doing well! As you can see I bolded a certain part of the last part of your previous post because this tells me all I need to know. You want assurance for your hair and you desperately look for an inner feeling of security. I can relate to that feeling but it makes us no longer objective. You cherry-picked information, anecdotes and data to create a reality that you feel comfortable with. You had hoped that other people would give that feeling to you (that is why you created this topic after all) but the results were not really what you were looking for so you started doing the work yourself. It seems like you are quite confident now about the success of our current treatments so good job on that.

However I feel it is my duty, as someone that has been here for quite some time now, that telling new yous such as yourself, that ignoring reality often leads to suffering in the long run.

His dermatologist agree with him, plus he got many patient maintain after 15 years. He definitely didn't say maintain forever, but 15 years is considered as a win for me, I'm pretty sure better treatment will come out in that 15 years. So why are you so pessimistic? According to you, it's better to suffering in a constant fear in 15 years than have some hope. Well, good for you I guess.

 

[INT]

His dermatologist agree with him, plus he got many patient maintain after 15 years. He definitely didn't say maintain forever, but 15 years is considered as a win for me, I'm pretty sure better treatment will come out in that 15 years. So why are you so pessimistic? According to you, it's better to suffering in a constant fear in 15 years than have some hope. Well, good for you I guess.

I am not pessimstic, I am realistic.

Did I say he has to suffer in fear? I told him that his current mindset might be a tad too optimistic which can lead to disappointment later on. You are making a strawman fallacy.

 

[wintop6211]

I am not pessimstic, I am realistic.

Did I say he has to suffer in fear? I told him that his current mindset might be a tad too optimistic which can lead to disappointment later on. You are making a strawman fallacy.

I think I'm the one been realistic here, don't you agree that there will be at least one better treatment coming out in 10 years? If finasteride loss efficacy(Which 86% of people won't have it), switch to another treatment, even it's not a cure, another few years probably, by then, either Shiseido, Follica or Tsuji should be out, at least one. My optimistic is based on hard evidence(Research, pipeline, trail data...) Your pessimistic is based on nothing, you are just making the worst assumption, even it's not likely to be true.

 

[INT]

I think I'm the one been realistic here, don't you agree that there will be at least one better treatment coming out in 10 years? If finasteride loss efficacy(Which 86% of people won't have it), switch to another treatment, even it's not a cure, another few years probably, by then, either Shiseido, Follica or Tsuji should be out, at least one. My optimistic is based on hard evidence(Research, pipeline, trail data...) Your pessimistic is based on nothing, you are just making the worst assumption, even it's not likely to be true.

There is a chance that we will have something better within the next 10 years. But that is based on speculation. The past has shown that a good looking future pipeline does not have to mean anything. You can find posts in 2003 of people asking whether it is even worth going on finasteride since 'the cure would be out anytime soon anyway'.

Again, I am waiting for the quotation where it is said that 86% of the finasteride users do not experience loss of efficacy...

Your optimism is not bases on hard evidence. Hard evidence would be a product that had finished al it's trials, published their results and had gotten a positive response from it's first long-term users. So far your 'hard evidence' is nothing more than speculation and hope.

Again my realism is based on 10 years of watching the hairloss research pipeline, having read 1000's of topics etc etc.

 

[dermrafok]

10 years ago has nothing to do with now 2017. Let's face it, new treatments are VERY CLOSE. We are realistic. That's all...

 

[yayapapaya]

10 years ago has nothing to do with now 2017. Let's face it, new treatments are VERY CLOSE. We are realistic. That's all...

That's exactly what ppl thought 10 years ago...

 

[Spanishboy97]

That's exactly what ppl thought 10 years ago...

How many treatments were in the pipeline 10 years ago?

 

[wintop6211]

There is a chance that we will have something better within the next 10 years. But that is based on speculation. The past has shown that a good looking future pipeline does not have to mean anything. You can find posts in 2003 of people asking whether it is even worth going on finasteride since 'the cure would be out anytime soon anyway'.

Again, I am waiting for the quotation where it is said that 86% of the finasteride users do not experience loss of efficacy...

Your optimism is not bases on hard evidence. Hard evidence would be a product that had finished al it's trials, published their results and had gotten a positive response from it's first long-term users. So far your 'hard evidence' is nothing more than speculation and hope.

Again my realism is based on 10 years of watching the hairloss research pipeline, having read 1000's of topics etc etc.

USE GOOGLE YOURSELF! https://www.bernsteinmedical.com/re...-to-investigate-long-term-effects-and-safety/ here you go. Don't you tell me you don't believe Dr. Bernstein. And don't use things like "Give me the quote" as a counter argument(As I assume that's your intention) when you don't agree what other people says, research before you speak.

 

[dermrafok]

That's exactly what ppl thought 10 years ago...

I was active in forums too. It really has nothing to do with it.

 

[soo]

"It is interesting to point out that of the 113
patients followed for 10 years, only 14% worsened,
whereas the remaining (86%) had benefits (21%)
from the treatment duration or (65%) persisted in
their improvements."

Finasteride, 1 mg daily administration on male androgenetic alopecia in different age groups: 10-year follow-up (PDF Download Available). Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...cia_in_different_age_groups_10-year_follow-up [accessed Oct 1, 2017].

If you wish for summary, go to Bernsteinmedical.com.

From the 5-year-study we know:

"Studies have shown that after five years of treatment, 90% of men taking finasteride experienced either a growth of new hair or a halt to their hair loss."
(https://www.bernsteinmedical.com/medical-treatment/propecia-finasteride/) ==> please don't make me search this study too, I've got no time... I think that's very well known for all of us, right?

In one point you were right, you can't tell after one year if you're a responder or not. It's just possible to tell after 5 years, if you take it precisely. But it changes absolutely nothing about the conclusion which is simple maths:

If you're one of those 90%, then 10% already dropped out after 5 years, which MUST (please don't dare critisizing this, it's like saying you can't prove that 2+2 is 4, because proving this mathematically is not possible too) mean that only 4% will worsen after 5 more years.

"Just because there is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years does not mean anything. The fact that there is no reason for it means that science is not far enough to provide an answer for it. We are waiting for studies to prove it? This shows how not objective you are. You are basically saying 'I really think it is the case, even though there is no real proof but I believe in it that much that I am 100% that science will agree with me at some point, just wait!'."

You do know that even researchers work with correlations, right? Tendencies and probabilities, to foresee an outcome. It's like watching a football game, one team leading 10:0 after 85 minutes and telling this doesn't mean anything because um well.. theoretically the others could still win, right? Or a crazy dude could show up and shoot them all with a rifle for fun. That's the guy you won't invite to the next match, be honest. When everything seems to point into one direction, believing in it happening is absolutely legit.

"The plural of anecdote is not evidence. And besides, my dermatologist actually uses finasteride himself and had never heard of side effects and here I am, more than one year later after quiting finasteride, still not recovered... What I am trying to say is, dermatologists should be experts in the topic, but more often than you would think they are not unfortunately."

Yes sure they're often not, but can you blame him for something happening that is so extremely rare to happen? When a doctor prescribes 1000 people aspirin (and yes, you can compare the probabilities of sides of finasteride and aspirin) and one of them gets uncurable sides forever, is he a hero for helping 999 of them or an unprofessional bastard for letting that happen to this one guy? He spoke of experience, probabilites and it's up to you to decide taking it or not. I blame him for saying never, that surely sounds fishy, but mine said he never had anyone with sides and that's a legit fact to tell to the patient. Working with chances and probabilities is not wrong if they're high enough, you can use them for decision making and opinions, you have to when there's no choice. Or are you never going to drive a car because there's "just" a 99.99...etc. chance to survive it to your working place?

"You have data to back these numbers up?"

With minoxidil I dit exactly that, I calculated probabilities, there is no evidence, you're right. But I brought up rational reasons to justify them, you can argue about it and they're not pure fantasy. The synergizing effect was mentioned on a very well known german site:

http://www.haarerkrankungen.de/expertenrat/faq.php?ParentRubrikID=19&Zaehler=11&MaxZaehler=25

"Hierzu gibt es keinerlei wissenschaftlich valide Studien. Ich kann nur aus unserer eigenen Erfahrung berichten. Wir haben zahlreiche Patienten zunächst mit einem Präparat, Propecia oder Regaine, behandelt. Die Behandlungsverläufe wurden mittels Photodokumentation festgehalten, so dass eine objektive Beurteilung auch über Jahre möglich ist. Bei den meisten Patienten konnte entweder ein stabiler Haarstatus oder eine Verdichtung des Haarkleides nachgewiesen werden. Nach 1-2 jähriger Monotherapie wurde dann das jeweils andere Präparat zugegeben und man konnte bei einigen Männern eine weitere, zum Teil sehr deutliche, Verdichtung des Haarkleides erkennen. Somit muss geschlussfolgert werden, dass die beiden Präparat auf unterschiedliche Weise synergistisch wirken. Wird ein Präparat abgesetzt, muss davon ausgegangen werden, dass die durch dies Medikament zugewonnenen oder erhaltenen Haare wieder ausfallen werden.

Dr. C. Kunte"

Google him if you think he's not a specialist on this field. And find a translator if you don't trust me.

"Great that your hair is doing well! As you can see I bolded a certain part of the last part of your previous post because this tells me all I need to know. You want assurance for your hair and you desperately look for an inner feeling of security. I can relate to that feeling but it makes us no longer objective. You cherry-picked information, anecdotes and data to create a reality that you feel comfortable with. You had hoped that other people would give that feeling to you (that is why you created this topic after all) but the results were not really what you were looking for so you started doing the work yourself. It seems like you are quite confident now about the success of our current treatments so good job on that."

Thank you! And I honestly hope that you're doing good too. But I don't "cherry-pick" stuff I'm not objectively convinced about. If you find good reasons to convince me that they're wrong, I definitely won't deny them.

 

[dermrafok]

"It is interesting to point out that of the 113
patients followed for 10 years, only 14% worsened,
whereas the remaining (86%) had benefits (21%)
from the treatment duration or (65%) persisted in
their improvements."

Finasteride, 1 mg daily administration on male androgenetic alopecia in different age groups: 10-year follow-up (PDF Download Available). Available from:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...cia_in_different_age_groups_10-year_follow-up [accessed Oct 1, 2017].

If you wish for summary, go to Bernsteinmedical.com.

From the 5-year-study we know:

"Studies have shown that after five years of treatment, 90% of men taking finasteride experienced either a growth of new hair or a halt to their hair loss."
(https://www.bernsteinmedical.com/medical-treatment/propecia-finasteride/) ==> please don't make me search this study too, I've got no time... I think that's very well known for all of us, right?

In one point you were right, you can't tell after one year if you're a responder or not. It's just possible to tell after 5 years, if you take it precisely. But it changes absolutely nothing about the conclusion which is simple maths:

If you're one of those 90%, then 10% already dropped out after 5 years, which MUST (please don't dare critisizing this, it's like saying you can't prove that 2+2 is 4, because proving this mathematically is not possible too) mean that only 4% will worsen after 5 more years.

"Just because there is no reason why it should be game over after 10 years does not mean anything. The fact that there is no reason for it means that science is not far enough to provide an answer for it. We are waiting for studies to prove it? This shows how not objective you are. You are basically saying 'I really think it is the case, even though there is no real proof but I believe in it that much that I am 100% that science will agree with me at some point, just wait!'."

You do know that even researchers work with correlations, right? Tendencies and probabilities, to foresee an outcome. It's like watching a football game, one team leading 10:0 after 85 minutes and telling this doesn't mean anything because um well.. theoretically the others could still win, right? Or a crazy dude could show up and shoot them all with a rifle for fun. That's the guy you won't invite to the next match, be honest. When everything seems to point into one direction, believing in it happening is absolutely legit.

"The plural of anecdote is not evidence. And besides, my dermatologist actually uses finasteride himself and had never heard of side effects and here I am, more than one year later after quiting finasteride, still not recovered... What I am trying to say is, dermatologists should be experts in the topic, but more often than you would think they are not unfortunately."

Yes sure they're often not, but can you blame him for something happening that is so extremely rare to happen? When a doctor prescribes 1000 people aspirin (and yes, you can compare the probabilities of sides of finasteride and aspirin) and one of them gets uncurable sides forever, is he a hero for helping 999 of them or an unprofessional bastard for letting that happen to this one guy? He spoke of experience, probabilites and it's up to you to decide taking it or not. I blame him for saying never, that surely sounds fishy, but mine said he never had anyone with sides and that's a legit fact to tell to the patient. Working with chances and probabilities is not wrong if they're high enough, you can use them for decision making and opinions, you have to when there's no choice. Or are you never going to drive a car because there's "just" a 99.99...etc. chance to survive it to your working place?

"You have data to back these numbers up?"

With minoxidil I dit exactly that, I calculated probabilities, there is no evidence, you're right. But I brought up rational reasons to justify them, you can argue about it and they're not pure fantasy. The synergizing effect was mentioned on a very well known german site:

http://www.haarerkrankungen.de/expertenrat/faq.php?ParentRubrikID=19&Zaehler=11&MaxZaehler=25

"Hierzu gibt es keinerlei wissenschaftlich valide Studien. Ich kann nur aus unserer eigenen Erfahrung berichten. Wir haben zahlreiche Patienten zunächst mit einem Präparat, Propecia oder Regaine, behandelt. Die Behandlungsverläufe wurden mittels Photodokumentation festgehalten, so dass eine objektive Beurteilung auch über Jahre möglich ist. Bei den meisten Patienten konnte entweder ein stabiler Haarstatus oder eine Verdichtung des Haarkleides nachgewiesen werden. Nach 1-2 jähriger Monotherapie wurde dann das jeweils andere Präparat zugegeben und man konnte bei einigen Männern eine weitere, zum Teil sehr deutliche, Verdichtung des Haarkleides erkennen. Somit muss geschlussfolgert werden, dass die beiden Präparat auf unterschiedliche Weise synergistisch wirken. Wird ein Präparat abgesetzt, muss davon ausgegangen werden, dass die durch dies Medikament zugewonnenen oder erhaltenen Haare wieder ausfallen werden.

Dr. C. Kunte"

Google him if you think he's not a specialist on this field. And find a translator if you don't trust me.

"Great that your hair is doing well! As you can see I bolded a certain part of the last part of your previous post because this tells me all I need to know. You want assurance for your hair and you desperately look for an inner feeling of security. I can relate to that feeling but it makes us no longer objective. You cherry-picked information, anecdotes and data to create a reality that you feel comfortable with. You had hoped that other people would give that feeling to you (that is why you created this topic after all) but the results were not really what you were looking for so you started doing the work yourself. It seems like you are quite confident now about the success of our current treatments so good job on that."

Thank you! And I honestly hope that you're doing good too. But I don't "cherry-pick" stuff I'm not objectively convinced about. If you find good reasons to convince me that they're wrong, I definitely won't deny them.

Ok, now you are agree with new treatments will be released very soon?

 

[yayapapaya]

Ok, now you are agree with new treatments will be released very soon?

Bruh, stop dreaming plz. Very soon= at least 5 years.