How Dutasteride utterly destroyed my hair and why you shouldn't take it

[Ziggyz123]

We’re you using minoxidil AT ALL?

 

[Ziggyz123]

It’s funny because my hair was thick and nice, just had a widows peak. I tried preventing loss by using finasteride and I had the exact thing happen to me. Sex drive went insane, oily skin, hairline destroyed.. tried literally everything including spironolactone like you. Never stopped my hair loss with any pharmacology. It’s been 6 years of me fighting this LOL and I take dutasteride anyway. I actually a experiencing gyno now with dutasteride and have had my hormones checked.
I’ve even used 2.5mg of dutasteride for 2 years straight and didn’t help. My dht wasn’t that low when I had it check which means my body is doing something else to create dht. My test is low though and I have every sign of low T imaginable.
These drugs are no bueno man

 

[ChemHead]

See... I could show all of you or any doctor my free and total testosterone while using finasteride and the natural reaction to those levels would be to say that they're high. And indeed, when you take a 5AR inhibitor, your testosterone will likely be high in concentration. However, concentration is not equivalent to rate of synthesis and high concentration does not mean that you are not androgen deprived. Steroid synthesis is a very dynamic thing... steroids are constantly being synthesized, metabolized, and eliminated, and when you cut off an entire metabolic pathway, you're losing the natural flow of steroids as well as disrupting their feedback loops. If there were a good way to measure the rate of synthesis of DHT and estrogens in tissues, they would be SIGNIFICANTLY higher than the concentration measured in circulation because that's how it's supposed to work... they're not meant to be in circulation in high amounts. They belong in peripheral tissues. So, by cutting of the 5AR pathway, you're cutting off a significant amount of androgen synthesis and you end up with higher testosterone and higher estrogen concentrations in circulation and, then, eventual reduction in steroid synthesis because of hypothalamic down-regulation. So, while testosterone and DHEA and other androgens may appear to be elevated, your total steroid synthesis and androgen synthesis is actually lower. It's like the difference between the number of water molecules measured flowing past a given point in a river that has had a dam built to restrict its flow vs. that same river with no dam. The river with no dam will see significantly more traffic in terms of water molecules at the point measured compared to the one with a dam because it has a much higher rate of flow. This is analogous to what's occurring with the use of finasteride except there's someone (the brain... hypothalamus, specifically) regulating the flow at the top of the river.

 

[Finasteridegyno]

@Caillou

No one should be taking any 5a-reductase inhibitor for hair loss without understanding what causes hair loss (and then they shouldn't take it anyway because it will be counterproductive in the end). I'll tell you exactly why this happened.

Hair loss is not androgen mediated. Testosterone does not cause hair loss. DHT does not cause hair loss. If you think about it, it doesn't even make logical sense. What happens as we age? We produce less steroids and our expression of steroid metabolizing enzymes is reduced or defiled in some way. Younger people are more potent and more virile... their rate of steroid synthesis is higher and their steroid receptor sensitivity is higher than those who are older and if androgens were the cause of hair loss, then most teenagers should have severe hair loss and we don't see that.

In reality, what's happening is that you're losing expression of 5AR and aromatase enzymes in the skin and hair follicles due to the presence of (likely) estrogens where they don't belong (in circulation). You want estrogens and other specialized steroids in the tissues they belong and not in circulation. If their concentration in circulation is too high, the estrogen receptors (or androgen or progesterone, etc.) in hypothalamus are over-activated and the hypothalamus cuts off steroid synthesis and aromatase expression by down-regulation of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH), lowering pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) (lowered FSH contributing to lowered aromatase expression).

Low intrafollicular synthesis of estrogens causes hair loss in both men and women. It's the same root cause for both, but manifests differently in men compared to women. There are two reasons for this:

1. Men generally (but not always) have a higher expression of 5AR in the skin and hair follicles. 5AR and aromatase are both competing to metabolize substrate (e.g. testosterone, androstenedione). If 5AR expression dominates aromatase expression in the hair follicles, guess what you end up with a deficiency in? Estrogens. It's not DHT causing the issue, it's poor enzymatic expression... 5AR is dominating aromatase expression and the binding affinity between androgens and 5AR is much higher than between androgens and aromatase. So, in men hair loss can be much more severe because they can have two things working against them: high 5AR expression drawing away androgens and leaving too few behind for sufficient aromatization, and low aromatase expression. Occasionally, you'll see men that have more of a female pattern loss and it's because they have the underlying low intrafollicular aromatase expression, but normal 5AR expression.

2. Hair loss manifests differently in women because they generally don't have high expression of 5AR in the skin or hair follicles. So, their problem strictly resides in their inability to produce sufficient intrafollicular estrogens caused strictly by poor aromatase expression. This is why their loss will manifest in a global diffuse pattern. Their entire scalp is deficient in aromatase expression so a global thinning occurs. 5AR expression in men causes an additional problem which results in more rapid loss of hair on the areas of the scalp that are more prone to insufficient blood supply.

Men have the added problem of 5AR in conjunction with (likely) low aromatase expression. As the condition progresses, tissue fibrosis worsens and blood flow further suffers, causing an even greater deficiency in intrafollicular estrogens, nutrition, and clearance of spent steroids. It seems to me that estrogens have a protective effect in the skin, either by protection against inflammation, increase in elasticity of skin, or both.

So, back to 5a-reductase inhibitors and why they won't work. When you cut off an entire metabolic pathway like 5AR, you're going to get a very sharp increase in concentration of upstream hormones like testosterone, androstenedione, progesterone, deoxycorticosterone, aldosterone... any steroid that takes that pathway is going to pool... it's going to become stagnant because there's no flow. There are many ways in which this is incredibly unhealthy, but let's just focus on what happens when testosterone and androstenedione are cut off from the 5AR pathway. Testosterone, for example, will pool. It will sharply increase in concentration and, because of this, you will experience a temporary sharp increase in estrogens. This is just reaction kinetics... probability... there's more testosterone and now that 5AR is not a viable pathway, the only player in the game is aromatase. So, this is actually the reason why finasteride or dutasteride have ANY positive effect on hair loss. They will cause a temporary increase in estrogen synthesis via metabolism of those pooled androgens. The problem is that while this is happening, it's also happening in the hypothalamus and it's job is to do whatever it takes to get your blood concentration of estrogens down to the safest level it's capable of. So, it down-regulates its secretion of GnRH and causes lower overall steroid synthesis (making you steroid deficient, not just androgen deficient) as well as reduced aromatase expression.

So, by taking dutasteride, you actually worsened your problem by lowering your body's ability to produce steroids and also lowering it's expression of aromatase. Both of these things reduce estrogenic activity in the follicles... reduced aromatase is obvious, and reduced steroid synthesis just limits the substrate available that can be aromatized.

The best thing anyone can do for both their hair and their health is to get their body to produce naturally higher levels of steroids and naturally higher levels of steroid metabolizing enzymes like aromatase (and even 5AR). If your body is synthesizing steroids at a higher rate and expressing higher levels of aromatase, it's because you have a better metabolic throughput. In other words, your body makes steroids, those steroid are transported to the cells of specialized tissues, those steroids are used, and then they're metabolized further and eliminated or reused appropriately. When they're not metabolized and dealt with properly in the tissues they're made in, then they end up in circulation and cause hypothalamic down-regulation. Aside from being healthier and getting your body to produce higher levels of steroids, scalp massaging, needling, and anything that can reverse tissue fibrosis and promote elasticity and blood flow will help.

For those that experience hair loss, I believe it's possible to reverse it and have a full head of hair, but it's not ever going to be easy. You have one or multiple genetic shortcomings that make having hair a full time effort, while others can eat trash and have awful habits and have a thick head of hair all the way until the day they die.

I have female pattern hair loss but I’ a man. I also have low level of e2 in the blood. So what can I do to stimulate aromatase in the hair follicle ???

 

[pegasus2]

This guy is deranged. All this stuff has been refuted many times on this forum yet it keeps coming up again. Some people just insist on clinging to their retarded theories. To anyone reading this thread do yourself a favor and skip this nonsense. Here is a more informative thread to go through with links to lots of good research https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...udy-on-androgenetic-alopecia-preprint.100943/

 

[ChemHead]

This guy is deranged. All this stuff has been refuted many times on this forum yet it keeps coming up again. Some people just insist on clinging to their retarded theories. To anyone reading this thread do yourself a favor and skip this nonsense. Here is a more informative thread to go through with links to lots of good research https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...udy-on-androgenetic-alopecia-preprint.100943/

Bravo. All the geniuses on this forum have refuted the deranged guy. Not a single clinical publication cited to refute the deranged guy, but he's been refuted nonetheless.

Why don't you explain to everyone what causes the mysterious finasteride/dutasteride shed that some people experience and some people don't. You all seem to know everything about that, right?... Except for what actually causes it and why. I'm glad chemical castration is working out for so many of you, but I just wonder why people that use such strong androgen antagonists are still complaining about hair loss. I can explain to you with perfect logic and reasoning why and how that shed occurs, I can cite clinical publications to help support it, and I can also use my own anecdotal experience to support it. But that's ok, deranged guy has been refuted.

I have an uncle with prostate cancer... he's a Serb and has no genetic hair loss in his family and he's always had a massive, thick head of hair. He is not on chemotherapy or radiation.. he's on the strongest androgen receptor antagonists in existence and started losing hair because of it. He's losing hair on powerful anti-androgens.... and I'm the delusional one.

I'm glad there are actually some reasonable people on this forum because there's a seriously high ratio of losers on here that live in an echo chamber and scream "I believe in science and research and numbers and clinical studies!" and yet they'll try to tear someone down while providing absolutely none of those things while doing so. It's pathetic.

Current clinical research does not prove that androgens cause hair loss. It only proves that androgen receptor antagonists and 5a-reductase inhibitors can help prevent, reverse, or improve hair loss and, because of this, everyone made the false assumption that androgens were responsible. Androgen receptor antagonists and 5a-reductase inhibitors don't just affect androgenic activity. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this. Find me a study that shows controlled and measurable synthesis of intrafollicular estrogens while androgens are administered at different concentrations to hair follicles. Find me an in vitro study comparing high intrafollicular synthesis of estrogens with androgens administered at various concentrations and then low intrafollicular synthesis of estrogens with androgens administered at various concentrations. If you can find a study like that that shows androgens will cause hair loss under those specific conditions, then I'll shut up. You won't, though, because they don't exist and those are the only types of studies that will ever prove that androgens are definitively causing hair loss.

 

[ChemHead]

I have female pattern hair loss but I’ a man. I also have low level of e2 in the blood. So what can I do to stimulate aromatase in the hair follicle ???

The best thing you can do is get your body to naturally synthesize higher levels of steroids. I've mentioned how I'm doing this in this thread and probably a few other threads on this forum. Think about when you began experiencing your FPHL. I'm not sure how old you are, but, at some point your hair started globally thinning across your entire scalp. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the thickness of the hair on the sides and back also reduced in diameter. This is because, as you are aging your total steroid synthesis rate is declining and your steroid metabolizing enzyme expression is also declining. Combine this with a congenitally low scalp aromatase expression and you're susceptible to hair loss. Luckily, for you, you don't seem to have elevated expression of 5a-reductase and, because of this, you don't have 5AR "stealing" your aromatizable substrate (your androgens).

Old men and women have low rates of steroid synthesis, they have low expression of 5a-reductase, and they have low expression of aromatase, among other steroid metabolizing enzymes. If aging produces less of basically all steroids, then hair loss should improve as androgens gradually lower with age. The opposite occurs because hair loss doesn't occur from an excess of anything. It occurs from an insufficiency of something. Simple logic.

 

[ChemHead]

I have female pattern hair loss but I’ a man. I also have low level of e2 in the blood. So what can I do to stimulate aromatase in the hair follicle ???

The other thing you can do is experiment with herbs or compounds that promote aromatase expression and demote 5AR expression. It's important that these compounds do not affect you systemically because if they do, you're going to interfere with the other side of the equation, which is the steroids that supplies the enzymes to synthesize intrafollicular estrogens. Low aromatase expression: insufficient intrafollicular estrogens. Elevated systemic aromatase expression: temporary elevation of estrogens: down-regulation of steroid synthesis and aromatase expression: insufficient intrafollicular estrogens. Elevated intrafollicular aromatase and normal steroid synthesis: elevated intrafollicular estrogens. Normal intrafollicular aromatase and elevated steroid synthesis: elevated intrafollicular estrogens. Elevated intrafollicular aromatase and elevated steroid synthesis: MORE elevated intrafollicular estrogens.

If you add 5AR into the equation, run another iteration of each of those scenarios with elevated intrafollicular 5AR expression and low intrafollicular 5AR expression. You don't seem to have an issue with elevated intrafollicular 5AR expression, though, since you're experiencing a diffuse pattern hair loss.

I would research scalp massages, scalp microneedling with a derminator, topical application of castor oil and topical administration of rosemary oil extract overnight. These target blood flow and scalp fibrosis, aromatase expression, and epigenetic down-regulation and up-regulation of genes in the skin of the scalp.

 

[Catagen]

Bravo. All the geniuses on this forum have refuted the deranged guy. Not a single clinical publication cited to refute the deranged guy, but he's been refuted nonetheless.

Why don't you explain to everyone what causes the mysterious finasteride/dutasteride shed that some people experience and some people don't. You all seem to know everything about that, right?... Except for what actually causes it and why. I'm glad chemical castration is working out for so many of you, but I just wonder why people that use such strong androgen antagonists are still complaining about hair loss. I can explain to you with perfect logic and reasoning why and how that shed occurs, I can cite clinical publications to help support it, and I can also use my own anecdotal experience to support it. But that's ok, deranged guy has been refuted.

I have an uncle with prostate cancer... he's a Serb and has no genetic hair loss in his family and he's always had a massive, thick head of hair. He is not on chemotherapy or radiation.. he's on the strongest androgen receptor antagonists in existence and started losing hair because of it. He's losing hair on powerful anti-androgens.... and I'm the delusional one.

I'm glad there are actually some reasonable people on this forum because there's a seriously high ratio of losers on here that live in an echo chamber and scream "I believe in science and research and numbers and clinical studies!" and yet they'll try to tear someone down while providing absolutely none of those things while doing so. It's pathetic.

Current clinical research does not prove that androgens cause hair loss. It only proves that androgen receptor antagonists and 5a-reductase inhibitors can help prevent, reverse, or improve hair loss and, because of this, everyone made the false assumption that androgens were responsible. Androgen receptor antagonists and 5a-reductase inhibitors don't just affect androgenic activity. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this. Find me a study that shows controlled and measurable synthesis of intrafollicular estrogens while androgens are administered at different concentrations to hair follicles. Find me an in vitro study comparing high intrafollicular synthesis of estrogens with androgens administered at various concentrations and then low intrafollicular synthesis of estrogens with androgens administered at various concentrations. If you can find a study like that that shows androgens will cause hair loss under those specific conditions, then I'll shut up. You won't, though, because they don't exist and those are the only types of studies that will ever prove that androgens are definitively causing hair loss.

Aight, show me pictures of regrowth or hair maintenance from whatever treatment you are proposing. Everyone out here sayin their hair loss is worse without providing pictures. OP didnt even give comparable pictures.
All you got is a proposal nothing backing it.
Comparable pictures or all you are saying is absolute horseshit.

 

[nachos]

@Me Vs DiffuseThinning

Dude why the hostility? All he did was post a theory that might or might not be true, but at the end it contains useful info that might help us nonetheless

Why dismiss all that because he spit out the harsh truth that finasteride and dutasteride are sh*t for your body even if they help your hair? The truth that you and many other people are too mentally weak to accept

I'm really sick of how people nowadays warp science to fit their points of view. Afraid of knowing more or changing their way of thinking because they see science as a religion set in stone that shouldn't be touched with any new ideas or ways of thinking because they're too primitive and close-minded that they only want what they believe in to be the only scientific view available

I put my stock in scientific research as opposed to broscience ramblings.

Wasn't the sample size only like 400-something?

There's got to be more to it. I don't think it's the increase in testosterone, but there is absolutely something that's causing a more rapid speed-up of male pattern baldness with these drugs. It just happened to me, too, over a month. Before that, I had very slightly receding temples, and it has been that way for years, literally still a NW0, and now, after a month, it pushed me back to a Norwood 1-1.5, all in a month. Drastic. I'm usually not one for "broscience", and I'm usually incredibly scientific-minded, but there is DEFINITELY something more at play here, and it's not just shedding.... You can't chock up an unnatural amount of people saying that the medication made their hairline worse, tried it for well over a year or two, etc., and all it did was make it look wispy and terrible, to "shedding", I'm convinced.

There are things we don't know. And there's definitely more at play here.

 

[Catagen]

Wasn't the sample size only like 400-something?

There's got to be more to it. I don't think it's the increase in testosterone, but there is absolutely something that's causing a more rapid speed-up of male pattern baldness with these drugs. It just happened to me, too, over a month. Before that, I had very slightly receding temples, and it has been that way for years, literally still a NW0, and now, after a month, it pushed me back to a Norwood 1-1.5, all in a month. Drastic. I'm usually not one for "broscience", and I'm usually incredibly scientific-minded, but there is DEFINITELY something more at play here, and it's not just shedding.... You can't chock up an unnatural amount of people saying that the medication made their hairline worse, tried it for well over a year or two, etc., and all it did was make it look wispy and terrible, to "shedding", I'm convinced.

There are things we don't know. And there's definitely more at play here.

You started dutasteride at NW0 and you went to NW1.5 in less than 30 days? I call bs.

 

[nachos]

You started dutasteride at NW0 and you went to NW1.5 in less than 45 days? I call bs.

I would have too before it happened. I thought people were full of sh*t until it happened to me too. There's a difference between being realistic, and being willfully ignorant. You're acting the latter. There are so many documented cases of this happening. There's no reason why hundreds of individuals would hop online and complain about this, if it were just fake. What would they gain? Are you seriously that untrusting and conspiracy-theory oriented, to think that everyone who had experienced such an outcome is bullshitting and lying? You're beginning to sound a whole lot like a certain American political group...

Regardless; It's your choice, kid. Live in denial, and continue talking down to those who experience accelerated hairloss because of the drug, continue that "I'm better than you" superiority complex, or maybe actually try to look at the hundreds of anecdotal comments from people who don't, or who have not recovered, and have had it only massacre their hairlines. Yes, it's anecdotal, but you're foolish if you think that it being anecdotal automatically means it's bullshit. Anecdotes are the reason for testing. For using the scientific method to disprove something. And the anecdotes for this happening are numerous. At some point anecdotes should be taken seriously, if there are enough of them. No, I don't think it's due to the residual testosterone, but there is so much that we do not know regarding hairloss, and that fact alone, coupled with the numerous anecdotes, makes this a viable worry.

You're choosing to remain willfully ignorant. Have a good day, my dude.

 

[ChemHead]

Comparable pictures or all you are saying is absolute horseshit.

That's a pretty distorted way of viewing the world. It's also a very cheap way of dismissing everything that I say without having a valid reason to do so. I mean... do whatever you want, but it's not logical.

I can't show any comparison because I have nothing to compare with yet. If you haven't been following anything I've said on this forum, that's ok, but I can't compare before and after because my clock doesn't start ticking until I'm fully recovered from finasteride. I can't show any anecdotal experience or pictures to support what I'm saying because what I'm suggesting is predicated upon having normal 5AR expression that hasn't been altered by finasteride and I'm just not there yet.

I'm very close to recovery... Like within the next 4-6 weeks probably. As soon as that happens, I'll need a full hair cycle to document my progress. So I'm going on say 7-8 months from recovery, I'll be able to definitively support what I'm saying from an anecdotal standpoint with physical evidence.

The logic and reason behind what I'm suggesting, however, is well supported by clinical publications. If there's something specific about what I say that you would like a citation for, I'd be glad to provide them.

 

[nachos]

That's a pretty distorted way of viewing the world. It's also a very cheap way of dismissing everything that I say without having a valid reason to do so. I mean... do whatever you want, but it's not logical.

I can't show any comparison because I have nothing to compare with yet. If you haven't been following anything I've said on this forum, that's ok, but I can't compare before and after because my clock doesn't start ticking until I'm fully recovered from finasteride. I can't show any anecdotal experience or pictures to support what I'm saying because what I'm suggesting is predicated upon having normal 5AR expression that hasn't been altered by finasteride and I'm just not there yet.

I'm very close to recovery... Like within the next 4-6 weeks probably. As soon as that happens, I'll need a full hair cycle to document my progress. So I'm going on say 7-8 months from recovery, I'll be able to definitively support what I'm saying from an anecdotal standpoint with physical evidence.

The logic and reason behind what I'm suggesting, however, is well supported by clinical publications. If there's something specific about what I say that you would like a citation for, I'd be glad to provide them.

Did it hurt your hairline too? Sorry, I missed a lot the past day or so. I'm considering hopping on Finasteride, after dutasteride wrecked my hairline. Do you think that would work? Getting kind of worried.

 

[ChemHead]

Did it hurt your hairline too? Sorry, I missed a lot the past day or so. I'm considering hopping on Finasteride, after dutasteride wrecked my hairline. Do you think that would work? Getting kind of worried.

Finasteride didn't hurt my hair line in the sense that it didn't targetedly affect my hair line negatively. As I mentioned, finasteride was INCREDIBLE for like a month in its effects on the thickening of my hair shaft diameter and the complete cessation if loss. The problem was that it only lasted at its peak for maybe a week and then after that, my hair became thin, dry, and wispy and started shedding again. In order to get those positive effects again, I had to stop taking finasteride, allow my 5AR expression and aromatase expression to return to normal, and then cycle back on it again.. and that was a 3-4 month recovery in the earlier days. I explained how all this works in a previous post in this thread, so just go back a few posts if you want more detail.

Based on what I've discovered about how finasteride works, it simply cannot be a solution because it directly works against your best interest. Anything that causes hypothalamic dysregulation and reduces your rate of steroid synthesis is not going to give most guys good hair long term (except those in which hypothalamic dysregulation is minimal or non-existent, which is rare). Without youthful of production of steroids (or extremely high intrafollicular aromatase expression... think old guys with great full heads of hair) you're going to be condemned to mediocre hair at best. Your supply of androgens is your supply of intrafollicular estrogens and anything that disrupts that is going to disrupt your hair growth. You have to have a supply of aromatizable steroid and you have to have the biological machinery within the hair follicle to produce estrogens. As long as you have those two things you'll have hair growth.

 

[Catagen]

That's a pretty distorted way of viewing the world. It's also a very cheap way of dismissing everything that I say without having a valid reason to do so. I mean... do whatever you want, but it's not logical.

Let me put it like this, do you believe in homeopathy due to its anecdotal evidence?

 

[nachos]

Let me put it like this, do you believe in homeopathy due to its anecdotal evidence?

Calling this out. Your argument is flawed. I can use, “oh so do you believe in essential oils and law of attraction too?” as an argument, but just because you’re comparing this to something heavily known to be fake, does not mean that you’re proving your point in this case. You’re arguing like a toddler. The fact that you think that this comparison is some sort of gotcha to a completely irrelevant argument is really kind of sad.

 

[ChemHead]

Let me put it like this, do you believe in homeopathy due to its anecdotal evidence?

Generally not, but it depends on the abundance of anecdotes and how well reputed the source.

I'm not asking anyone to believe anecdotes, though. If you want to tell me I'm wrong, that's fine, but tell me where specifically you think I'm wrong and a cited clinical publication supporting why you think I'm wrong would also be appreciated. I can respect and appreciate that type of interaction. That's why if you have a problem with something specific about the pathology I've proposed for the mechanism behind finasteride, point it out to me and I'll provide clinical publications to support why I make that particular claim.

 

[Catagen]

Calling this out. Your argument is flawed. I can use, “oh so do you believe in essential oils and law of attraction too?” as an argument, but just because you’re comparing this to something heavily known to be fake, does not mean that you’re proving your point in this case. You’re arguing like a toddler. The fact that you think that this comparison is some sort of gotcha to a completely irrelevant argument is really kind of sad.

Yeah it is fake because anecdotes dont mean sh*t, and they mean even less if they dont have comparable pictures in hair loss topics.

Generally not, but it depends on the abundance of anecdotes and how well reputed the source.

I'm not asking anyone to believe anecdotes, though. If you want to tell me I'm wrong, that's fine, but tell me where specifically you think I'm wrong and a cited clinical publication supporting why you think I'm wrong would also be appreciated. I can respect and appreciate that type of interaction. That's why if you have a problem with something specific about the pathology I've proposed for the mechanism behind finasteride, point it out to me and I'll provide clinical publications to support why I make that particular claim.

Can you show me hundreds of cases with pictures where individuals lose multiple norwoods of hair loss while on finasteride/dutasteride only for a year or less? Some people say they went from NW1 to MW4 in a few months and they have zero evidence to back it up.

Astrology and homeopathy have millions of anecdotes behind them and they are all worthless.

 

[nachos]

Yeah it is fake because anecdotes dont mean sh*t, and they mean even less if they dont have comparable pictures in hair loss topics.

Can you show me hundreds of cases with pictures where individuals lose multiple norwoods of hair loss while on finasteride/dutasteride only for a year or less? Some people say they went from NW1 to MW4 in a few months and they have zero evidence to back it up.

Astrology and homeopathy have millions of anecdotes behind them and they are all worthless.

Yeah, you’re an idiot. We’re done. You’re not worth my time or energy. You’re a child. An ignorant little child who doesn’t know how to argue. But by all means, keep trying SO hard to ignore reality because you’re scared of it. Enjoy your life. Blocked.