Does RU really degrade rapidly in a solution?
- Thread starter inferno
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 42
Enden said:
I'm serious as a heart attack!
Enden said:Ah, nevermind, the hair simply won't grow? I thought you were going to sacrifice it and examine the prostate or whateverMaybe I should get a pet?? What vehicle and strength do you recommend? I don't want the animal to suffer.
The test itself (as I intend it to be) would be completely non-invasive. It's just a matter of examining the flank-organs of the animal (or just the spotted marks over the flank-organs), which is a standard test that's been done by lots of doctors and scientists over the years. It wouldn't hurt the animal, as long as you don't accidentally cut him as you're shaving or snipping away his fur, so that you can see his spots.
You would use the same vehicle as what you're applying to yourself; just a lot less of it, of course (maybe just a drop).
- Reaction score
- 42
Enden said:
It doesn't have anything to do with his fur growing back, it's the size of his flank-organs (or the dark spots over the flank-organs). Those are very sensitive to androgenic stimulation, and applying RU to them topically (or many other antiandrogens or 5a-reductase inhibitors) will cause them to be noticeably reduced in size. It's a pretty common test in the medical world.
- Reaction score
- 42
Enden said:
The test obviously wouldn't be as precise as it would be if serious scientists or doctors were doing it, but I do think it can go a long way to help determine if there's any validity at all to this speculative theory about "degrading" RU solutions that's been floating around these hairloss sites for a long time. Even if one has only a limited amount of patience (and hamsters) to do the testing, I can easily imagine taking the testing to an extreme: first get _some_ idea of what to expect from very freshly-made RU solution (more on this specific issue in the next paragraph), then do it again later using a solution that's VERY old, like a couple of months or more. If one can even just "eye-ball" a difference in effectiveness between the old and the new solutions like that (like maybe a 50% reduction from the fresh solution, compared to a barely-noticeable reduction from the old solution), then even just THAT would be an important result! We'd know not to leave the solutions sitting around for months at a time!!
For more on this hamster testing, I recommend reading the original 1994 Battmann paper on RU58841. He used hamsters himself in the original testing, along with mice and rats. Interestingly, the doses of RU58841 that he applied to the hamsters were much lower than what we tend to expect; the maximum dose was only 100 micrograms (0.1 mg)! The flank-organ reductions he got from that dose were 32.1% after 1 week, and 52.4% after 3 weeks.
