Alright fair enough, his western username threw me. Still doesn't excuse the intellectual dishonesty.
The thing that I find endearing is when James calls people "dumb" or "stupid" or whatever negative adjective when purportedly he wants to convince you of his point of view. I find that people in life don't respond well to being called epithets. The point he is raising again, appears to be based on what I call conceptual logic, the same as our prostaglandin-inclined friends. Many of them who are honest will admit that they have no idea why protaglandins only slightly work or don't work at all. One guy said that his flow chart was perfect and still no hair improvement.
So while I don't doubt what he is saying is relevant conceptually, it is probably the case that for most or many people, the other metabolites or post metabolites of DHT, yes need reductase but in actuality, these other transformations are largely irrelevant to physical or mental health or James, they could actually be negatives for many people so there is no cause for concern when weighing the devastating effects of baldness against the chance of temporary sides, much less so, ones that endure for years.
Again, the Romans understood the concept of
post hoc ergo propter hoc, why don't people today?
I don't know what his solution to baldness is besides deriding finasteride and the people like me who think it is the greatest advance in hair loss prevention
ever, in the history of mankind. I have no doubt that finasteride and duta save lives from both suicide but also from indolence and apathy and isolation that all come from being bald or balding to the point that it ruins one's life. It's not just the hair loss. Most of us expect that, gradually perhaps but what shocks me since I first noticed when I was almost 20, but people contact me who started balding at 13, 14, 15, and so on. I can only imagine the horror of that and how it would psychologically scar a person
forever.
While calling baldness "disfigurement" is excessive, there are very few other transformations in life that could change a person's appearance more than being completely bald, especially in say one to two years in an unrelenting manner. People some times complain that I am the Pied Piper of transgenderism, out to destroy the maleness of our youth--Goddess knows, we could have a war and nothing but pansies with long hair ready to fight the, well not commies but somebody and we won't be ready.
Given that most of HRT, if not all of HRT for males is reversible, I think maintaining hair might be a goal of many, many young people. We may also find ways to use lower amounts of estradiol for younger people to avoid outward feminization but even if not, breast reduction is more reliable than transplants and women, particularly younger women say from 12 to 25, tend to prefer less threatening men. Look at the teeny bopper magazines. This dates me a lot but they featured stars like Scott Baio and Leif Garret, not Clint Eastwood or Burt Reynolds. Anyone who looks a picture of Leif Garret when he was 16 and then at 21 can only feel heartbreak for the guy. Like
@bridgeburn, who did it in reverse, Garret lost his age and his youth in a second and then wore a bandana on his head going forward and I get it.
These pics are not for the faint at heart guys but the ravages of DHT are devastating and females, unless they rarely bald, never face anything like this sort of falling off a cliff, looks-wise.
