Italian Hair Loss Lotion To Hit The Market In 2016

[Jimm]

The Facebook page was made in May 2018, and it was called "Trinov" since then. At that time, the name was not officially publicised or leaked, so no one besides the company knew that that would be the official product name. It also links an official Fidia webmail specifically made for the product, with the Fidia address: trinov@fidiapharma.it. And I am no expert on email names and domains but I doubt you can just make a mail @fidiapharma.it without having the rights to.
It is only since recently that the page has become public.

Thanks for the clarification, my guy.

 

[The 7TH Sense]

So, the studies compared with duration out of mind is not great. Is duration the huge factor here as far as differences go and the Brotzu lotion’s potential?

I can't say if it looks great or not... finasteride study was 48 weeks, which is approximately 11 months/ a year. Brotzu lasted exactly the half. If you open the study I attached and look at the graphs provided, finasteride made significant improvements between the 24 week (aka 6 month mark) and the 48 week (aka 1 year mark) follow ups.
Plus, finasteride study was against placebo...
Then, the age of the patients was 30 (finasteride) against 46 (trinov). This could make a huge difference, given that the standard deviation calculated on trinov age participants is 6.4 (!!!) against practically 0 of fina. Age matters a lot, also because of the onset time of hair loss, since recovery usually happens if you catch your Androgenetic Alopecia early.
Plus as the Brotzu crew stated, in men the significant results appeared later than women, between T3 and T6. A positive trend should be expected if the study lasted longer. What I liked the most, personally, is the fact that the trinov study covered entirely the period of the seasonal effluvium and the lotion was still able to improve both pull tests and wash tests and also the Anagen hair number. This is rather important, I would say.
And the number of patients enrolled was very different between the two. So any conjecture on long term maintenance (which is what we are really into if we are looking for a finasteride replacement) is just a low quality hypothesis. I still think the key here is S-Equol and how good and fast it is in preventing the DHT, locally produced in the scalp, from entering the internal part of the follicle.

All these words to say to the people in this thread to run AT LEAST a 1 year trial on this sh*t, if they got enough money to try. This is probably the only option we'll have in the short term and for those who can't take finasteride like me it may be over if this sh*t doesn't work at least like finasteride. I wrote all these posts because I'm trying to say that a 6 month test is useless. I must say that I envy the ones who have so much money to risk for so much time, though...

 

[nick123]

I can't say if it looks great or not... finasteride study was 48 weeks, which is approximately 11 months/ a year. Brotzu lasted exactly the half. If you open the study I attached and look at the graphs provided, finasteride made significant improvements between the 24 week (aka 6 month mark) and the 48 week (aka 1 year mark) follow ups.
Plus, finasteride study was against placebo...
Then, the age of the patients was 30 (finasteride) against 46 (trinov). This could make a huge difference, given that the standard deviation calculated on trinov age participants is 6.4 (!!!) against practically 0 of fina. Age matters a lot, also because of the onset time of hair loss, since recovery usually happens if you catch your Androgenetic Alopecia early.
Plus as the Brotzu crew stated, in men the significant results appeared later than women, between T3 and T6. A positive trend should be expected if the study lasted longer. What I liked the most, personally, is the fact that the trinov study covered entirely the period of the seasonal effluvium and the lotion was still able to improve both pull tests and wash tests and also the Anagen hair number. This is rather important, I would say.
And the number of patients enrolled was very different between the two. So any conjecture on long term maintenance (which is what we are really into if we are looking for a finasteride replacement) is just a low quality hypothesis. I still think the key here is S-Equol and how good and fast it is in preventing the DHT, locally produced in the scalp, from entering the internal part of the follicle.

All these words to say to the people in this thread to run AT LEAST a 1 year trial on this sh*t, if they got enough money to try. This is probably the only option we'll have in the short term and for those who can't take finasteride like me it may be over if this sh*t doesn't work at least like finasteride. I wrote all these posts because I'm trying to say that a 6 month test is useless. I must say that I envy the ones who have so much money to risk for so much time, though...

This gives me a tiny glimmer of hope otherwise if it doesn't pan out there's not much left for me thus just ending it all.

 

[vegetassj]

Why and how did you habe access to the study?

I mean those brotzu improvements (if legit) are solid taking into account that the patiens were quite old already and the duration was short.

 

[worm]

Big thanks to @jonnywalker93 for providing a very interesting finasteride study that I'm now shortly comparing to Brotzu, and which I'm attaching to this message.

The finasteride study was conducted in 2000 and lasted 48 weeks. It shows how anagen hairs increase progressively over time and how telogen hairs decrease while on finasteride.
The Brotzu study was conducted in 2016 and lasted "6 months" from May to December (not specified how many weeks, nor the exact start/endpoints).

Mean age in finasteride study was 30,2 +- 0.6 (standard deviation provided).
Mean age in Brotzu study was 46.6 +- 6.4 (standard deviation provided).

Number of patients in finasteride study was 220.
Number of patients in Brotzu study was 30 (males).

I'll consider only the male subjects in the Brotzu studies because of the differences between male pattern baldness and FPB but also mainly because of the different composition of the female lotions.

I'm reporting exactly the numbers listened by the two studies. Standard deviation was used in both studies as a measure of the standard error SE.

FINASTERIDE
Anagen hair: +18.1 (from 124.4+-4.9 to 142.5+-5.4)
Telogen hair: -10.9 (from 75.1+-4.0 to 64.2+-3.3)
Hair count: +7.4 (+3.7%) (from 200.0+-5.2 to 207.4+-5.4)

BROTZU:
Anagen hair: +5.0 (from 64.3+-10.5 to 69.3+-11.0)
Telogen hair: -5.0 (from 35.7+-10.5 to 30.7+-11.0)
Hair count: +2.3 (+1.6%) (from 144.5+-29.0 to 146.8+-30.5)

I don't want to post screenshots of Brotzu study, but for both of them all the results listed were statistically significant (p<0.05).

I'm proposing a brief and synthetic yet probably FLAWED analysis, but I want to get to the point: are treatments even comparable?
The finasteride study reports this:
" In this study, finasteride treatment increased the amount and percentage of anagen hair and improved the anagen to telogen ratio in men with male pattern
hair loss. Anagen hair count, first measured at 24 weeks, increased progressively over 48 weeks for
finasteride-treated subjects. In contrast, placebo-treated subjects lost anagen hair during the study, consistent with the progressive shortening of the anagen phase duration that leads to the hallmark of androgenetic alopecia, follicular miniaturization. By 48 weeks, treat-
ment with finasteride had resulted in a 26% net improvement in anagen hairs compared with placebo. This increase in anagen hair count, together with the
increase in the anagen to telogen ratio, is direct evidence that treatment with finasteride promotes the
conversion of hair follicles into the anagen phase. While the duration of the anagen phase decreases between successive growth cycles in male pattern hair
loss, the length of the lag phase also increases, contributing to the rate of apparent hair loss. Thus,
the increase in the anagen hair count observed with finasteride treatment could be due to the reversal of both of these processes. A more precise characterization of the effect of finasteride on the duration of the specific phases of the hair growth cycle would require that individual hair follicles be followed over successive cycles and the length of each phase measured. Regardless, the results of this study confirm that
finasteride treatment increases total hair count by increasing actively growing anagen hair.
The ratio of anagen to telogen hairs was also shown to increase progressively over 48 weeks of finasteride treatment. The increase in the anagen to telogen ratio with finasteride treatment at 24 weeks reflected
primarily the changes in anagen hair count, as telogen hair count had not significantly changed from baseline.
As the duration of the telogen phase is not altered in male pattern hair loss, finasteride treatment is not likely to affect this phase directly. Rather, as anagen phase is prolonged, fewer hairs are in telogen. Thus, the telogen hair count would be expected eventually to decrease with finasteride, due to continued prolongation of the anagen phase. This is consistent with the observation that, in this study, the reduction in the telogen hair count, and its favourable effect on the anagen to telogen ratio, followed the increase in the anagen hair count with finasteride. These positive changes in the hair cycle, associated with the progressive improvement in scalp coverage observed in treated subjects, imply favourable consequences on clinically important aspects of hair quality (thickness, length, growth rate, growth duration and/or pigmentation) in men on treatment. "

Brotzu study stopped at 6 months. There were significant differences between men and women regarding the onset of the benefits. Brotzu study says:
" Men experienced a constant improvement, at the end of treatment (6 months), 63.3% of them had experienced an increase in total hair number (Figure 5). A significant increase in anagen hair and a significant decrease in telogen hair were observed starting from 3 months, together with a significant increase in the pull test score. The wash test provided a significantly better score already starting from the first month. No significant increase in the hair diameter was observed at any time point. Women, differently than men, experienced a significant increase in the total number of hair already after the first month of treatment; at 6 months, most (89.7%) had experienced improvement (Figure 6). In women, a significant increase in anagen hair and a significant decrease in telogen hair were observed starting from the first month. Pull test and wash test scores also improved starting from the first month of treatment. "

Brotzu team provides this explanation:
" Response of men was slightly different than that of women; the lotion had a significant effect on the total hair number in women, and its effects on the number of the anagen and telogen hair as well as those on the pull test appeared later in men than in women. These differences might be due to the different hormonal profile of the two sexes. At present, in fact, the role of androgens in female alopecia is still unclear (Olsen et al., 2001; Ioannides et al., 2015; Torres et al., 2015). Further studies should therefore be granted to investigate the differences observed in the present investigation concerning the response of women and men. "

In the finasteride study, we have this note in the conclusion:
" As in men, similar hair growth cycle abnormalities are observed in women with androgenetic alopecia. However, results from a placebo-controlled study of postmenopausal women with androgenetic alopecia demonstrated no benefit of finasteride after 1 year. This difference in treatment efficacy between men and women may be due to gender differences in the role of type 2 5a-reductase in the pathophysiology of androgenetic alopecia. "

This may be another confirmation of the differences between male and female groups in Brotzu study.

Now, re-analyzing the anagen phase stuff and the links to cosmetic improvements, I found this over the web. It is a 5 year study on Finasteride's effect on Androgenetic Alopecia. Title:

Long-term (5-year) multinational experience with finasteride 1 mg in the treatment of men with androgenetic alopecia

European Journal of Dermatology. Volume 12, Number 1, 38-49, Janvier - Février 2002, Thérapie

The most interesting part in this regard is this:

" Based on the predefined endpoints utilizing photographic methods (hair counts and global photographic assessment), peak efficacy was observed at one to two years of treatment with finasteride. This observation of an apparent peaking effect is likely due, in part, to the previously-reported beneficial effects of finasteride on the hair growth cycle based on a phototrichogram study [26]. In that study, initiation of finasteride treatment was shown to increase the number of anagen-phase hairs and to increase the anagen to telogen ratio, consistent with normalization of the growth cycles of previously miniaturized hairs due to the release of hair follicles from the inhibitory effects of DHT [26]. Consistent with these results, finasteride treatment was also shown to increase the growth rate and/or thickness of hairs, based on analysis of serial hair weight measurements [27]. Because these beneficial changes in the hair growth cycle are dependent on when therapy with finasteride is initiated and occur rapidly, the affected hairs are driven to cycle in a synchronous manner. If these hairs have somewhat similar anagen phase durations, they would enter telogen phase as the anagen (and catagen) phase ended, followed by subsequent shedding, in a partially synchronized fashion. This would be expected to produce a gradual decline from peak hair count after a period of time equal to the average anagen phase duration. Eventually, as subsequent growth cycles recurred, these hairs would be expected to become increasingly independent, thereby losing their synchronous character as their growth cycles further normalized over time, leading to a sustained increase in hair count at a plateau above baseline, as suggested by the 5-year data presented here."

This would also explain why some men experience a sudden loss of gains on finasteride: if their hair is synchronized from the initiation of finasteride a year or two (or more) ago, when their hair reaches the telogen phase there would be massive shedding. This apparent loss would remain until the hair started growing again (3 months) and would take several more months for the hair to grow and provide a cosmetic improvement. Perhaps some of these guys who drop finasteride when they think results are fading are not giving enough time for the synchronized telogen phase to end.

Then, of course, we have all the good explanations provided by prof.Tosti in my last post and published on the journal to support the Anagen phase boost as the fundamental way of work of finasteride.

Sounds encouraging, and thanks for the time you put into this, it must have taken you a while to write this up.

From what i can gather it seems to simply halt hairloss. Less tologen = increase in anagen hairs in same ratio. Hopefully in the second half of the year it will do that much more and pair results with finasteride.

That said the +/- range on trinov exceeds the improvement for all three markers they measure - again hopefully thats something that shrinks due to improved results in 2nd half of the year.

Do u have side by side info on finasteride to compare 6 month results?

 

[se8]

I can't say if it looks great or not... finasteride study was 48 weeks, which is approximately 11 months/ a year. Brotzu lasted exactly the half. If you open the study I attached and look at the graphs provided, finasteride made significant improvements between the 24 week (aka 6 month mark) and the 48 week (aka 1 year mark) follow ups.
Plus, finasteride study was against placebo...
Then, the age of the patients was 30 (finasteride) against 46 (trinov). This could make a huge difference, given that the standard deviation calculated on trinov age participants is 6.4 (!!!) against practically 0 of fina. Age matters a lot, also because of the onset time of hair loss, since recovery usually happens if you catch your Androgenetic Alopecia early.
Plus as the Brotzu crew stated, in men the significant results appeared later than women, between T3 and T6. A positive trend should be expected if the study lasted longer. What I liked the most, personally, is the fact that the trinov study covered entirely the period of the seasonal effluvium and the lotion was still able to improve both pull tests and wash tests and also the Anagen hair number. This is rather important, I would say.
And the number of patients enrolled was very different between the two. So any conjecture on long term maintenance (which is what we are really into if we are looking for a finasteride replacement) is just a low quality hypothesis. I still think the key here is S-Equol and how good and fast it is in preventing the DHT, locally produced in the scalp, from entering the internal part of the follicle.

All these words to say to the people in this thread to run AT LEAST a 1 year trial on this sh*t, if they got enough money to try. This is probably the only option we'll have in the short term and for those who can't take finasteride like me it may be over if this sh*t doesn't work at least like finasteride. I wrote all these posts because I'm trying to say that a 6 month test is useless. I must say that I envy the ones who have so much money to risk for so much time, though...

Thank you very much for this analysis! You rock!

I will try Brotzu for 18 months as soon as it's released and I will post my feedback here.

 

[Bigoldben]

I think I'll try it predominantly on the front of my hair, I used finasteride for 6 months but started to grow a booby so came off. It has since largely gone away and improves day on day. When I went on finasteride I was Norwood 0.5-1.5 but was also suffering from diffuse thinning. By the time I came off I had my juvenile hairline back but exceptionally thin at the front so I've figured I could probably get by with half measurements on my temples and the front few inches. If it works then I'll expand it for a year or so before attempting to follow Beps' maintenance scheme of three times a week. If it doesn't work I'll have spent £200 tops finding out. Obviously a lot of money, especially if it goes towards a company that has deliberately fooled me. However I kind of figure that, given I have the money spare at the moment, it is worth the risk in order to find out what we've been questioning for months/ years.

 

[Jimm]

I don’t think it’s a good idea to commit to buying and testing anything for a year if Fidia literally does not one thing more than throw up a website with some pictures of the product packaging.

 

[Dinnosaur]

this man is starting to promote this scam website on youtube.

 

[Johnt1997]

I've given the facebook page a like

Will definitely use the lotion on my crown as i need improvement there the most, will use a little at front but i have a transplant booked for April and i anticipate trinov won't make enough difference on temples, small to medium improvements in crown will make a big difference for me though

 

[ToLGuy]

Boys i have decided, after contemplating couple of days I'm willing to give this product a good try, going to shave my head and not worry about my hair for a couple of months. Will give my head a good rubbing every night, even if it doesn't do sh*t just for a peace of mind.

Instead of rubbing, you could dermaroll or use another microneedling device. There is scientific evidence backing that up, as well as some crazy anecdotal success stories of regrowth. Check the Microneedling thread, I've totally jumped into that hype train and got the f*** out of this one. Maybe I'll jump back into the Brotzu hype IF:
-Microneedling ends up doing nothing for me after a one year assessment
-The Brotzu community trial of this forum reveals that Trinov actually works and outperforms at least one of the Big 3.

Let's see what happens next year

 

[byebyehair]

Hair count: +7.4 (+3.7%) (from 200.0+-5.2 to 207.4+-5.4)

Hair count: +2.3 (+1.6%) (from 144.5+-29.0 to 146.8+-30.5)

I guess this numbers are hair/cm² that means the guys in the fina study were almost not balding in the analysed area.
So, considering all the differences in the studys; Age, Degree of balding, Study duration.
The Brotzu lotion might be a very good treatment after all and most likely side free.
Another thing that is encouraging (not for me) is that fina does nothing for women while the brotzu lotion does. That should mean that the have different kinds of action which means they should sinergize!

I will give it a shot for at least half a year and will provide pictures.
For the pictures i will use the state of the art photo technic in the hairloss industry.
Wet unfavorable combed hair with strong light for before pictures.
Dry combover hair with weak light for the after pictures

 

[Badbald]

First of all thanks @The 7TH Sense for the first informative post in a while and actually fairly positive news.

I would say however to everyone looking at basing their opinions of the lotion on those studies to take them with a grain of salt. I havent read them in full like 7th sense but im assuming they were not conducted by a 3rd party but by Fidia themselves, and this becomes a pretty big problem for any company bringing to market a pharmaceutical product that is the first of its kind and only has this as evidence for its efficiency. I wouldn't totally rely on these results to be truthful or accurate or not twisted/presented to their advantage. Fidia dont have the best reputation within the industry anyway let alone from how people feel about them on these forums so I dont know about all of it really.

Putting that aside and assuming they are accurate the brief 6month testing leaves a little bit of a question mark also they may have changed the formula since the studies in order to sort out the stability issues, im hoping this is somehow a positive rather then negative with wishful thinking that they also looked at efficiency when reformulating but thats probably a million miles off.

 

[Armando Jose]

Big thanks to @jonnywalker93 for providing a very interesting finasteride study that I'm now shortly comparing to Brotzu, and which I'm attaching to this message.

The finasteride study was conducted in 2000 and lasted 48 weeks. It shows how anagen hairs increase progressively over time and how telogen hairs decrease while on finasteride.
The Brotzu study was conducted in 2016 and lasted "6 months" from May to December (not specified how many weeks, nor the exact start/endpoints).

Mean age in finasteride study was 30,2 +- 0.6 (standard deviation provided).
Mean age in Brotzu study was 46.6 +- 6.4 (standard deviation provided).

Number of patients in finasteride study was 220.
Number of patients in Brotzu study was 30 (males).

I'll consider only the male subjects in the Brotzu studies because of the differences between male pattern baldness and FPB but also mainly because of the different composition of the female lotions.

I'm reporting exactly the numbers listened by the two studies. Standard deviation was used in both studies as a measure of the standard error SE.

FINASTERIDE
Anagen hair: +18.1 (from 124.4+-4.9 to 142.5+-5.4)
Telogen hair: -10.9 (from 75.1+-4.0 to 64.2+-3.3)
Hair count: +7.4 (+3.7%) (from 200.0+-5.2 to 207.4+-5.4)

BROTZU:
Anagen hair: +5.0 (from 64.3+-10.5 to 69.3+-11.0)
Telogen hair: -5.0 (from 35.7+-10.5 to 30.7+-11.0)
Hair count: +2.3 (+1.6%) (from 144.5+-29.0 to 146.8+-30.5)

I don't want to post screenshots of Brotzu study, but for both of them all the results listed were statistically significant (p<0.05).

I'm proposing a brief and synthetic yet probably FLAWED analysis, but I want to get to the point: are treatments even comparable?
The finasteride study reports this:
" In this study, finasteride treatment increased the amount and percentage of anagen hair and improved the anagen to telogen ratio in men with male pattern
hair loss. Anagen hair count, first measured at 24 weeks, increased progressively over 48 weeks for
finasteride-treated subjects. In contrast, placebo-treated subjects lost anagen hair during the study, consistent with the progressive shortening of the anagen phase duration that leads to the hallmark of androgenetic alopecia, follicular miniaturization. By 48 weeks, treat-
ment with finasteride had resulted in a 26% net improvement in anagen hairs compared with placebo. This increase in anagen hair count, together with the
increase in the anagen to telogen ratio, is direct evidence that treatment with finasteride promotes the
conversion of hair follicles into the anagen phase. While the duration of the anagen phase decreases between successive growth cycles in male pattern hair
loss, the length of the lag phase also increases, contributing to the rate of apparent hair loss. Thus,
the increase in the anagen hair count observed with finasteride treatment could be due to the reversal of both of these processes. A more precise characterization of the effect of finasteride on the duration of the specific phases of the hair growth cycle would require that individual hair follicles be followed over successive cycles and the length of each phase measured. Regardless, the results of this study confirm that
finasteride treatment increases total hair count by increasing actively growing anagen hair.
The ratio of anagen to telogen hairs was also shown to increase progressively over 48 weeks of finasteride treatment. The increase in the anagen to telogen ratio with finasteride treatment at 24 weeks reflected
primarily the changes in anagen hair count, as telogen hair count had not significantly changed from baseline.
As the duration of the telogen phase is not altered in male pattern hair loss, finasteride treatment is not likely to affect this phase directly. Rather, as anagen phase is prolonged, fewer hairs are in telogen. Thus, the telogen hair count would be expected eventually to decrease with finasteride, due to continued prolongation of the anagen phase. This is consistent with the observation that, in this study, the reduction in the telogen hair count, and its favourable effect on the anagen to telogen ratio, followed the increase in the anagen hair count with finasteride. These positive changes in the hair cycle, associated with the progressive improvement in scalp coverage observed in treated subjects, imply favourable consequences on clinically important aspects of hair quality (thickness, length, growth rate, growth duration and/or pigmentation) in men on treatment. "

Brotzu study stopped at 6 months. There were significant differences between men and women regarding the onset of the benefits. Brotzu study says:
" Men experienced a constant improvement, at the end of treatment (6 months), 63.3% of them had experienced an increase in total hair number (Figure 5). A significant increase in anagen hair and a significant decrease in telogen hair were observed starting from 3 months, together with a significant increase in the pull test score. The wash test provided a significantly better score already starting from the first month. No significant increase in the hair diameter was observed at any time point. Women, differently than men, experienced a significant increase in the total number of hair already after the first month of treatment; at 6 months, most (89.7%) had experienced improvement (Figure 6). In women, a significant increase in anagen hair and a significant decrease in telogen hair were observed starting from the first month. Pull test and wash test scores also improved starting from the first month of treatment. "

Brotzu team provides this explanation:
" Response of men was slightly different than that of women; the lotion had a significant effect on the total hair number in women, and its effects on the number of the anagen and telogen hair as well as those on the pull test appeared later in men than in women. These differences might be due to the different hormonal profile of the two sexes. At present, in fact, the role of androgens in female alopecia is still unclear (Olsen et al., 2001; Ioannides et al., 2015; Torres et al., 2015). Further studies should therefore be granted to investigate the differences observed in the present investigation concerning the response of women and men. "

In the finasteride study, we have this note in the conclusion:
" As in men, similar hair growth cycle abnormalities are observed in women with androgenetic alopecia. However, results from a placebo-controlled study of postmenopausal women with androgenetic alopecia demonstrated no benefit of finasteride after 1 year. This difference in treatment efficacy between men and women may be due to gender differences in the role of type 2 5a-reductase in the pathophysiology of androgenetic alopecia. "

This may be another confirmation of the differences between male and female groups in Brotzu study.

Now, re-analyzing the anagen phase stuff and the links to cosmetic improvements, I found this over the web. It is a 5 year study on Finasteride's effect on Androgenetic Alopecia. Title:

Long-term (5-year) multinational experience with finasteride 1 mg in the treatment of men with androgenetic alopecia

European Journal of Dermatology. Volume 12, Number 1, 38-49, Janvier - Février 2002, Thérapie

The most interesting part in this regard is this:

" Based on the predefined endpoints utilizing photographic methods (hair counts and global photographic assessment), peak efficacy was observed at one to two years of treatment with finasteride. This observation of an apparent peaking effect is likely due, in part, to the previously-reported beneficial effects of finasteride on the hair growth cycle based on a phototrichogram study [26]. In that study, initiation of finasteride treatment was shown to increase the number of anagen-phase hairs and to increase the anagen to telogen ratio, consistent with normalization of the growth cycles of previously miniaturized hairs due to the release of hair follicles from the inhibitory effects of DHT [26]. Consistent with these results, finasteride treatment was also shown to increase the growth rate and/or thickness of hairs, based on analysis of serial hair weight measurements [27]. Because these beneficial changes in the hair growth cycle are dependent on when therapy with finasteride is initiated and occur rapidly, the affected hairs are driven to cycle in a synchronous manner. If these hairs have somewhat similar anagen phase durations, they would enter telogen phase as the anagen (and catagen) phase ended, followed by subsequent shedding, in a partially synchronized fashion. This would be expected to produce a gradual decline from peak hair count after a period of time equal to the average anagen phase duration. Eventually, as subsequent growth cycles recurred, these hairs would be expected to become increasingly independent, thereby losing their synchronous character as their growth cycles further normalized over time, leading to a sustained increase in hair count at a plateau above baseline, as suggested by the 5-year data presented here."

This would also explain why some men experience a sudden loss of gains on finasteride: if their hair is synchronized from the initiation of finasteride a year or two (or more) ago, when their hair reaches the telogen phase there would be massive shedding. This apparent loss would remain until the hair started growing again (3 months) and would take several more months for the hair to grow and provide a cosmetic improvement. Perhaps some of these guys who drop finasteride when they think results are fading are not giving enough time for the synchronized telogen phase to end.

Then, of course, we have all the good explanations provided by prof.Tosti in my last post and published on the journal to support the Anagen phase boost as the fundamental way of work of finasteride.

This clinical study was entirely supported by Merck
Research Laboratories, Merck & Co., Inc. Merck & Co.,
Inc. is the company that manufactures and markets
finasteride.

 

[Eazy12]

Dat der snek oyl

 

[inmyhead]

This clinical study was entirely supported by Merck
Research Laboratories, Merck & Co., Inc. Merck & Co.,
Inc. is the company that manufactures and markets
finasteride.

Oh wow man. So that's probably alarming too that Tsuji's studies are supported by Rikken?

This argument doesn't make much sense. What you are saying is that When a company is trying to publish a new drug it's studies should be sponsored by someone else

 

[byebyehair]

Oh wow man. So that's probably alarming too that Tsuji's studies are supported by Rikken?

This argument doesn't make much sense. What you are saying is that When a company is trying to publish a new drug it's studies should be sponsored by someone else

This reminds me of the orange man who wanted to build a wall paid by the mexicans

 

[alibaba92]

Oh wow man. So that's probably alarming too that Tsuji's studies are supported by Rikken?

This argument doesn't make much sense. What you are saying is that When a company is trying to publish a new drug it's studies should be sponsored by someone else

We need a study to be peer reviewed by a third reputable party

 

[Badbald]

This clinical study was entirely supported by Merck
Research Laboratories, Merck & Co., Inc. Merck & Co.,
Inc. is the company that manufactures and markets
finasteride.

I here you but I wouldnt put Merck and Fidia in the same class, Merck are a far more reputable company one of the largest within the field. Fidia are on an extremly small scale in comparison. Merck are able to conduct a far more accurate and reliable study they have a strong reputation within big pharma and they dont need to hinge results to their side nearly as much a fidia would in terms of not needing the profit. Having said that even Merecks reporting from their original finasteride studies are iffy in terms of the side effect ratio, so much so that they got sued and had to alter their percentages with risks later on.

 

[Badbald]

Oh wow man. So that's probably alarming too that Tsuji's studies are supported by Rikken?

This argument doesn't make much sense. What you are saying is that When a company is trying to publish a new drug it's studies should be sponsored by someone else

Supported or conducted? because theres a big difference