- Reaction score
- 460
LOLReading the posts in order:
And now the dude gets schooled another time
"You wouldn't compare S-Equol with estrogen"
View attachment 83259
View attachment 83262
View attachment 83260
View attachment 83261
(I Never said S Equol was a "proper" estrogen anyways, I just used the example of the topical estrogen to destroy the stupid bias that a topical can't regrow so much hair. S-Equol is indeed a "phytoestrogen" or a "plant estrogen", so it has selective estrogen features, it has an affinity for the estrogen receptor beta comparable to 17-beta-estradiol. I did not use the example to say that, but just because you attacked me in a rage, let's prove you wrong in your first quote: the estrogens bind to the estrogen receptors, S-Equol has an affinity to the estrogen receptor beta, so indeed it does act like an estrogen in this situation; plus it binds to DHT causing the formation of a compound that is no more able to bimd to the androgen receptor. In reality, I never meant to make a comparison between Equol and estrogens, I repeat that I used 17 beta estradiol to counter one of the stupidest point that cyclically gets repeated, then you made all by yourself not understanding a single f*** of my post, accusing me of a lack of knowledge and then getting schooled by the other users, LMAO)
( EDIT (4 teh lulz) : I just noticed it, it's funny that your profile pic is a group of goats. Here in Italy when someone is ignorant we call it "capra" which in fact means "goat". Perfect choice of your profile pic after what you posted, this is my reaction to your "What? Equol binds to DHT?"
lol remember that I have never said Equol is like an estrogen, never even compared the two, you could have argued differently, maybe saying "but Equol is not a estrogen therefore can't do their functions" and argued your point, with which I agree, Equol is not an estrogen and can't be compared with them in general terms, but instead you chose to go on full-retard mode, talked bullshit out of your ignorance, and being an a**h** with that Applemets phrase, and now you are taking the sh*t that you deserve!
Capra! Capra! Capra! Capra! )
I was ignorant on the part about S-Equol binding to DHT. True. My mistake.
Nonetheless, that doesn't render your posts more credible.
You still have no evidence to back up your silly claims. None.
It wasn't me who indirectly drew comparison between s-equol and estrogen(s) so as to validate a claim that the lotion can achieve substantial regrowth. It was you.
Not even dutasteride which reduces DHT by 90-98% can lead to substantial regrowth.
Why would a phytoestrogen do that?
Mi dispiace, però that is fishy on your behalf, especially if we make allowances for the fact that it was you who wrote (as per usual) a lengthy post promoting Applemets.
I digress.
S-Equol has been used in the past without great effectiveness.
https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...w-hair-loss-treatment-based-on-s-equol.62501/
Why should it work this time?
Tutto che scrivi è merde delle capre. Lo sappiamo anch' i due.