"It is my belief based on observed evidence" is literally what broscience is. Every single halfway decent scientific study has established a causal link between androgens (primarily DHT, but others as well) to male pattern baldness.
For the vast majority of men, finasteride is plenty to stop the progression of male pattern baldness (even if it doesn't reverse it). Dutasteride is even more effective. Likewise, androgen blockers have been shown to be effective.
Even though those medications will work for most men, it doesn't work for everyone (like some people on this forum), but if we are to speculate why this may be, we've gone far past the realm of science and are beyond what amateurs can really determine.
No, that's the fundamental basis for the development of science as a discipline.
I've never argued against DHT being a causal factor, but arguing that it is far more complex than asserting "testosterone is the sole cause, just reduce it dramatically". My hypothesis based on what I've observed and my own experience based on hormone tests - is that pattern hairloss is often exacerbated but not solely caused by DHT. I actually disagree that finasteride is an appropriate treatment for most cases of pattern hairloss as it ignores the prevalence of other problem hormones or health issues.
Effective in the sense that they block androgens, but effective in terms of maintaining hair and keeping the subject healthy and looking healthy are two entirely different things.
And no, your final sentence sums up what amounts to an argument from ignorance, like I said the fundamental basis of science was people empirically formulating a hypothesis based on variables they could observe and categorize. Without that we would not have the luxury of what you believe we can only rely on now for diagnostic purposes.
It's my argument that finasteride is fundamentally unhealthy and an excessive measure for most men and that it's adverse health effects are often perceived on a time scale too long for most people to attribute to it's use.
Example:
https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1204#:~:text=Conclusions The risk of developing,dutasteride and those receiving finasteride.
Those people who do take those meds who develop full blown diabetes are fucked for hair growth regardless and all they've done is compound an already complex problem. This is precisely what I'm talking about, you wanted a somewhat legit source that contributes to my hypothesis, there you are.
Low testosterone exacerbates poor insulin sensitivity, so this becomes a worsening spiral of unhealthy patterns which simply won't result in quality hair regrowth. My hypothesis is that given western genetics and eating habits, this is actually more of a problem than men simply having too much DHT and it needing to be reduced as a means of preserving hair.
New study examining testosterone increasing insulin sensitivity shows that raising testosterone levels can help male patients with type 2 diabetes.
www.diabetesincontrol.com
Estrogen can also optimize insulin sensitivity, and if there's a means by which it can be applied contemporaneously without completely decimating testosterone levels, you theoretically can reduce risk of insulin resistance/diabetes which can exacerbate pattern hair loss, and improve hair growth without throwing yourself into a hypohormonal state.
Premenopausal women exhibit enhanced insulin sensitivity and reduced incidence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) compared with age-matched men, but this advantage disapp
diabetes.diabetesjournals.org
Simply because I don't have a laboratory or staff or a research institute at my disposal does not make my observations illegitimate, that's not what makes a hypothesis "broscience".
