Ok so, let's say we all just utterly doused our heads in flu

[nickypoos]

Agreed. Though el_dut gave me the impression flutamide was better than spironolactone from his older posts.

 

[thinincrown]

Agreed. Though el_dut gave me the impression flutamide was better than spironolactone from his older posts.

I think flut it is better than spironolactone BUT it more than likely acts via an internal mechanism, not topically like the others mentioned by Hoppi.

Bryan took that guy from MDF to task about how flutamide was getting results and the guy pretty much had to break down and say that it's effect was a result of the internal reduction of dht in the blood not the scalp alone....

 

[Hoppi]

Flutamide blocks androgen receptors doesn't it? So... are we saying it found it's way into the blood stream and blocked receptors, achieving a similar effect to finasteride inhibiting 5ar in receptors?

One thing I don't understand is why internal spironolactone gives such bad sides, when one wouldn't imagine blocking receptors is as harsh on the body as inhibiting the enzyme.. would you? Unless of course it has other mechanisms as well.


EDIT -- Oo and look at this stuff I found while looking up Flutamide on Wikipedia (at which time I discovered that yes, it does work by binding to the ARs lol) - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicalutamide

It says it is more side-free than flutamide..

.. ah, although apparently it has a long 5 day half-life in the body, as opposed to flutamide's 7 hours. So sides are less likely, but if you DO get them, you'll have them for the long haul!! lol

Then again finasteride lingers for about 3 or 4 days too, but that's not quite as bad.

 

[Bryan]

Probably because if they did everyone would say "hmmm independent study, must be BS"

Why would anybody say such a thing about an independent study?

Im curious to know if Dr Proctor has done any independent studies on prox-n?

To the best of my knowledge, he hasn't done that.

Bryan, if you are skeptical of Fluridil thats fine, dont use it...but I wouldnt discourage people from at least trying something, that at least in my case, was far better than spironolactone, revivogen, or minoxidil all of which I have used. It even halted my excessive loss which not even proscar could do after 6 years of use.

Don't worry, I seldom ever mention fluridil. I was only prompted to do it now because of what Todd said.

 

[Todd]

Fluridil works; and I'm not saying this because I want it to work. Nor do I say it because I use it (I don't).

I say it because clinical trials have proven it.

As I've said several times in the past, I would be FAR more accepting of fluridil, if only it were to be tested successfully by independent doctors and scientists. The only ones to have tested it in clinical trials (I believe) were the makers/sellers of the drug themselves. An incredible number of independent doctors have tested topical minoxidil and finasteride over the years; why hasn't the same thing ever been done even ONE TIME for fluridil? :dunno:

I agree; testing by the makers is all the more reason to be sceptical, so if the test is to be truly trustworthy it has to be of especially high standards.
But companies send their own drugs on trials all the time (who else are going to test them?); but in order for consumers and doctors to trust those trials, it is important that the trials are carried out in a way that eliminates any bias the makers might have.

That is why you got to love that double blinded vs. placebo- model. Any drug that has not been tested in this way, is generally not considered a safe and/or effective drug, IMO.

Of course, this model too, has to be carried out correctly, but in the case of fluridil: I believe this is done par excellence.
Peer reviews are generally positive and it is published in a respectable American journal (not some backwater, foreign- language journal from the nineties).

Sure, there are things about this study to be weary of: the test group (43 males) is a little small and the study measures effect by measuring percentage of follicles in the anagen phase in test group vs placebo, rather then percentage of users growing hair vs. users not growing (in other words: good inter- group data, poor intra- group data) I think, though, this is mentioned in the full article: something like 78% of users stopping shedding. Going to check it out.

But, yeah, I to would love to see independent research on fluridil: especially one lasting over years and comparing results to finasteride and minoxidil.
That would indeed give us a clearer picture.

 

[Bryan]

One thing I don't understand is why internal spironolactone gives such bad sides, when one wouldn't imagine blocking receptors is as harsh on the body as inhibiting the enzyme.. would you?

You've really got a hard-on for this issue of inhibiting the 5a-reductase enzyme, don't you?

Blocking androgen receptors with antiandrogens is a BIG, serious issue, affecting all things male, because it affects all androgens. Merely inhibiting the 5a-reductase enzyme is considered less of a problem, because even though it suppresses one particular potent androgen (DHT), it doesn't affect the others very much.

 

[Hoppi]

Ah fair enough

Is that why finasteride is also more commonly prescribed than any AR blocker for the treatment of BPH? It makes sense I guess!

Although, one advantage I could see is that it may not lose effectiveness with time like finasteride, depending of course on WHY finasteride loses effectiveness with time in some individuals.

At the very least, I find it interesting that a relatively safe (apparently it's much safer than internal spironolactone or flutamide) oral AR blocker exists

 

[Bryan]

Is that why finasteride is also more commonly prescribed than any AR blocker for the treatment of BPH? It makes sense I guess!

Exactly.

At the very least, I find it interesting that a relatively safe (apparently it's much safer than internal spironolactone or flutamide) oral AR blocker exists

What drug are you talking about?

 

[Hoppi]

What drug are you talking about?

Bicalutamide. Apparently it is safer than flutamide and I believe spironolactone for taking internally. That doesn't mean it's safer than finasteride though

I suppose it lacks a place these days though, at least for men. finasteride is safer and possibly more effective, and topically RU is stronger and spironolactone and flutamide have much shorter half-lives.

However, I wouldn't rule out it's possible effectiveness as a topical treatment

 

[Bryan]

Bicalutamide. Apparently it is safer than flutamide and I believe spironolactone for taking internally. That doesn't mean it's safer than finasteride though

The "safer than flutamide" thing has more to do with a relatively less harmful effect on specific organs like the liver. Again: the use of oral antiandrogens by men in anything more than small, insignificant doses is VERY VERY serious! If you think you had a bad time taking Propecia, you ain't seen nothing yet, if you're seriously thinking about taking flutamide or bicalutamide! :shock:

 

[Bryan]

I'll repeat the fascinating story told to me by my friend "maneless", one of the most colorful characters ever to post on hairloss sites: he actuall took the FULL dose of flutamide orally for a period of time (250 mg, three times a day), and became so sick that he was barely able even to get out of bed to go use the toilet. He told me that he literally had to crawl to the bathroom on his hands and knees, just to do his business! :woot:

Fortunately he stopped taking the stuff, and gradually recovered completely.

 

[Hoppi]

aw wow I'm really glad he recovered!

To be honest no I don't think I full appreciated how bad these things can be! I guess I appreciate the relative safety of finasteride more now

 

[Todd]

Speaking about AR- bockers; there was this guy who posted on this site a while ago; saying he wanted to try androcur for hairloss.

Now this is an extremely potent drug; the sort of drug you take to "cure" hypersexuality, deviant sexual behaviour and if you want to be a woman. That's right; male to female transgender patients take this drug. It acts on the HPT- axis (the hypothalamus to be more specific, I believe, lowering GnRH- but I might be wrong) I ADDITION to blocking androgen receptors. Serum testosterone effectively drops to trace amounts- and voila: you are chemically neutered.

There are way, way, WAY more powerful stuff out there than spironolactone or flutamide; even RU: but it's generally not a good idea to experiment with. Not even rubbing it on your head.

(speaking of friends: I have a whack friend who tried to take contraceptive pills for a month to see if it reduced his hair loss. It didn't, but he seemed to cry a lot, and his tits REALLY started hurting...)

 

[Hoppi]

how odd monty ._.

I wonder what on earth could have changed to suddenly make fluridil ineffective. Do you think it's just not strong enough now you aren't on dutasteride or finasteride?

And Todd that's mad - yeah you have to be very careful with the body!

The thing is, we can block or inhibit ARs as much as we want in the scalp buuuut.. the trick is making sure it doesn't make it far into the blood stream, or last long in it...

 

[Hoppi]

That sounds like a serum DHT jump and/or increased receptor sensitivity

RU58841?

I'm also quite interested in the possible role of estrogen, but I dunno if it's true!

 

[Hoppi]

That sounds like a serum DHT jump and/or increased receptor sensitivity

RU58841?

I'm also quite interested in the possible role of estrogen, but I dunno if it's true!

Indeed RU58841

i was set to order it an needed stuff and my clutch went. Amyway gonna order it next week. need to look over the ru thread to see what I need. gonna go 50mgs a day.

Read of a bloke used topical DIM to disasterous results. Pretty sure estrogen does no harm to hair.

hm.

I mean, the reason I'm particularly suspicious of estrogen, is because apparently male pattern baldness severity tends to correlate to prostate size. AND estrogen is pretty recognized I believe as a trigger of prostate enlargement. So.. you can see where my suspicion arises from!

 

[Hoppi]

hm yeah that is a lot, I couldn't imagine losing that many.. doesn't it like REALLY burn? Mine burns like mad with inflammation sometimes and my hair loss rate is nowhere near that fast

Erm, yeah try just nuking it blind with a tried and tested RU approach (irishpride's or El dutasteride's)

Maybe that will have an effect!

 

[Todd]

Monty: I guess fluridil doesn't match dutasteride in effect at all

Maybe RU will...

Btw, have you had your initial minoxidil shed, yet?
I seem to recall that you used minoxidil w/retin a in addition to fluridil. Three to four months in- that's about when minoxidil shedding gets REALLY nasty.

 

[Hoppi]

Erm, joke is with my hair.. let me explain.

I have general diffuse thinning over the top area, but my hair is nice and thick naturally, and long, so that masks it, as you just notice that at the top it looks a bit less... healthy and stuff. Like the male pattern baldness area looks weaker and less populated lol No visible scalp really, but that's just because it's thick, dark hair still, even if there's less of it.

I have more dandruff, and it's noticeably on my scalp itself, if I scratch my scalp I get a fair bit from it now (never used to).

Inflammation can be bad, it's up and down. I lose quite a few hairs when I wash it, and every day I need to go into the bathroom and get out the dead hairs, or they fall around me all day (because they are so long, it's very obvious).

The hairline is very slowly receding. No real focus at the crown or "bald spot" or any kind.

However, as this all started with what I now believe is an egg intolerance, I am hoping that by removing the original health decline trigger completely, my skin will slowly heal, my digestion will heal, my sex hormone levels will go back to normal and my hair may even start to recover as/if my androgen receptors calm down again.

Time will tell... >.<

 

[Hoppi]

I never like posting pictures ._. I guess I'm self-conscious ._.