Why are there so many people making excuses for Brotzu's son? If he claims he recovered 2 Norwood's and then sits quiet for 2 years and it turns out he didn't, why try to rationalize it instead of take it at face value?
"Well he's been balding for 20 years, so it wouldn't work that well". You realize in order to actually think that, you believe two things:
1. He shamelessly lied for 2 years (for no other reason than to drum up false hype) but you're okay with it and it's not a big deal
2. You're literally using his own 5 year claim in order to rationalize and downplay his lie above. When the 5 year claim should be considered a lie as well.
Except the very last phrase, you got a solid point. More than one, I sincerely think that you are the only one who ever brought up good and valid "pessimist" points.
I agree, trying to justify his hair situation using the words of him and his father is just a cope. I would like to remember that, however, I didn't personally see hus situation (I am a "Norwood spotter" very experienced and precise) but surely he didn't have a blatant cosmetic improvement, either way because he keeps shaving or because he didn't experience that much regrowth if any. There's still the point to argue that to a regular guy not into hairloss, a transition between NW5A and 4 could (maybe) not be perceived. But 2 IESON users said to have seen his photos, (and you can bet they're Norwood-spotters) and they said he even worsened a bit from the only visible photo of him on the internet.
I asked 2 tester friends of him and they were kind and gentle even while showing me photos of their kids, but both when I asked about Giuseppe Brotzu's hairs stopped responding. It's quite shady also that There's nothing visible on FB, I mean you can't find no more than a photo of him.
If I'm not wrong, he himself told to Clockwise in a message that he recovered "
some hair" but his Androgenetic Alopecia was too old and advanced ? Very different from the 2 NWs claims.
What I'm thinking though is that this is not a scam, I mean, they genuinely found something, but in their findings maybe they weren't able to properly identify (due to the lack of knowledge in the hairloss field) the boundaries/limits of their discovery, or maybe they went too far with their claims.
This is what I'm fearing, that maybe they exaggerated in the sense they expressed themselves too approximately or maybe they were literally hit by the hype created by us and did nothing to "redimensionate" the case.
However, given the Areata results, I am sure this is not a scam and since it turned out to be exactly what the professor always said, I'm somewhat confident that the results Fidia will show will be truly of the size of the claims HE made (and not OUR interpretations), which, in their purest form, are:
- the lotion stops the hair fall;
- the lotion causes thickening and regrowth in the measure of: age of the patient, age of the Alopecia, "traditional" factors.
Either way, what should comfort us is that the study which will be presented is focused on Androgenetic Alopecia. This means that whatever claim that they will make at the congress will be backed up or demonstrable in some ways. You just can't anymore get away with a cosmetic that says something shady or unproven, At least in Italy. Finally recently Crescina (the Prince of all hairloss scams) was destroyed by a national tribunal process, they even said that "the molecule used in the product in any way can be associated with regrowth of hair in any form, hence the advertisements are declared as false".
I'm really interested in what they will say at the congress, I will take for truthful and sincere every claim they will make, because the study was carried and finished and they can't be that stupid to risk a legal cause for false advertising. Usually cosmetics are not backed with studies or researches like these that we have for this lotion (many exceptions could be found in what I just wrote, but not in the hairloss world, never seen a cosmetics backed by documented studies).
.
