Marcia was hot.
On the estrogen thread, it was discussed that estriol had the relatively highest affinity for the beta receptors which seem to be primarily responsible for hair growth in the estrogenic pathway. However, its absolute affinity for the receptors in general is obviously much less than estradiol. Perhaps part of the reason estradiol is more efficacious is because it is powerful enough to be functioning as an antiandrogen in some capacity? This may explain why some may get results on estradiol alone, whereas I've seen members claim they don't get any results on estriol. Thus, if on estriol, or something mostly estriol with a little estradiol like bi-estro, maybe it is imperative to also be on some sort of antiandrogen? This is something I'm currently experimenting with, with RU and bi-estro, so time will tell, but was just curious as to your thoughts on this theory.
My current thought is that anyone who can reach 200pg/ml and stay at that level for 18-24 months is very, very likely to experience full restoration or close to it, using only estradiol in any of the various forms. As long as they hit this target with say 9 ng/ml say, I think that it "turns on" hair almost like a light switch in a binary all or nothing pattern, meaning very little noise away from whatever the chosen sum is.
Good question about the AA's. This where I think people get mixed up but it seemed to me that certain marginal hair improvement occurred well below adult female targets for me. It just wasn't very apparent to others, so some receptors are marginal and might get turned back on incrementally but not the vast majority so then you have to jump to female target levels to get the female hair. It appears true of facial feminzation that it also requires hitting targets except for around the eyes and almost everybody feminizes around the eyes and it is apparent early.
So as we reach our plateau on/off level for targets, those below those levels might only be able to turn on hair regrowth via AA's which spoof the higher E2 and T levels needed by blocking receptors to essentially trick the body into beginning female hair growth. AA's don't grow hair on their own but like lower levels of estrogen, they activate some marginal hair receptors. But in terms of hair restoration, meaning newly visible terminal hair from bald scalp, nothing can do that but estradiol even if she needs the AA's to hit targets. It's subtly different but for some/most gals now, they can easily hit targets so Estradiol should be enough on it's own. What's changed is the movement from synthetics and non-human forms of estrogen found in Premarin and Ethinyl Estradiol. These were more powerful somewhat but they presented large risks when used long periods so doctors started limiting dosages to the point where MtF's weren't feminizing. So it's not the AA that is every really needed. People have to hit targets and for many people, middling T and E2 is fine for others types of feminization so they don't realize they aren't hitting targets and missing certain benefits.
When Rob wrote his article on HRT and Hair Regrowth in September of 2017, a couple of different MtF's argued asking hair regrowth being possible which seemed bizarre to me. And many MtF's get hair transplants which makes me cringe unless we are talking about one tiny area but at least give estradiol a chance at higher levels. So last month and really the four or so before that, I have been pushing cis-female first trimester estrogen levels at over 2,500pg/ml because being pregnant is good for hair and it might accelerate things or promote more restoration since pregnancy is associated with great hair.
Finally, I would predict that all sheds occurring when moving in an MtF medical direction are good things and the body's best means of shrugging the male hair all off and starting together with "female hair" all starting anagen in unison. This is conceivably better and more efficient than gradual shed and so should be simply endured if hair restoration is the ultimate goal regardless. I was at just the right point to throw on the wig, but cis-guys don't want to wear wigs and they don't want to be bald for the next year at working or wherever, riding the shed out.
So, in this context, maybe I am stuck in the middle. One, sheds are horrifying and take a long time to grow back so that argues again higher levels of AA's but if sheds are actually all benevolent when moving close towards adult female target, then they should be encouraged, almost. Otherwise, how does the new hair link up in anagen. So this different way of looking at things currently fascinates me. But look at
@bridgeburn; he was active between 18 and 24 months and he was obviously hitting targets the whole time when we list his meds and later use of SL estradiol. I think now that might be the general key and we just ignore sheds and have a prior plan for how to ride one out for approximately 8 months for me before it was no longer patchy so either hats, a system or a wig or if you think that sprinkly stuff works before so you won't desist and ruin your results.