Prolactin "minitherapy" with SMI-1 (novel protocol for lowering prolactin locally)

[polishkickbuttowski]

Goddamn some people are dumb. If SMI works i can't wait to read "Of course it works! It improves blood circulation to the scalp!" People with "alternate theories" need to figure out something useful instead of derailing every thread that actually has promise.

 

[Norwood-null-by-2021]

There's enough blood supply to support transplanted hairs so why not native hairs? What's the difference?

With a hair transplant, the surrounding healthy tissue is also transplanted.

 

[FilthyFrancis]

Ralf Paus is doing a live QnA on HLC2020. One dude enquired on his thoughts about the "phenomal promise" of prolactin blockers. Here is his reply:
"Am not so sure about “phenomenal promise”… While blocking prolactin receptor-mediated signaling may be useful in male pattern balding, prolactin even appears to be needed for female scalp hair follicle growth. Thus, “blocking prolactin” might backfire in female pattern hair loss. More research on the role of prolactin in human scalp hair follicle physiology and in male versus female pattern balding needed before one jumps to premature conclusions."

 

[FollicleGuardian]

It doesn’t seem like he’s aware of BAY’s results in the macaques

 

[FilthyFrancis]

Atleast it's good for males then

I thought the same . I think his point was rather to say that prolactin inhibition is not a very well-studied topic and the contradicting results on males/females is making the subject even more complex to comprehend.

It doesn’t seem like he’s aware of BAY’s results in the macaques

He hasn't. One dude asked about what he thought about Hope and he replied he didn't know.

Don't want to rain on the parade. I am just trying to lower your expectations guys. Just like Pascal's wager, if PRLR inhibition turns out to be incredible, you will be contemplating infinite pleasure

 

[Norwood-null-by-2021]

Retinoic acid topically also inhibits the PRL receptors:

Retinoic acid modulates prolactin receptor expression and prolactin-induced STAT-5 activation in breast cancer cells in vitro - PubMed

Two recent papers demonstrate that prolactin plays an important role in the induction and progression of mammary tumours. Retinoids have been shown to be potent inhibitors of breast carcinogenesis. We studied expression of prolactin receptor mRNA in human breast cancer cell lines MCF-7, SKBR-3...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Study on retinoic acid and Androgenetic Alopecia:

Topical tretinoin for hair growth promotion - PubMed

Topical all-trans-retinoic acid (tretinoin) alone and in combination with 0.5% minoxidil has been tested for the promotion of hair growth in 56 subjects with androgenetic alopecia. After 1 year, the combination of topical tretinoin with 0.5% minoxidil resulted in terminal hair regrowth in 66% of...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

However, the success wasn't that special.
It is true that 58% of the subjects had regrowth after 1 year.
But it didn't seem to help 42%, even with minoxidil.

So either the dose was too low or the whole thing is not as effective as we are led.

 

[whatevr]

So either the dose was too low or the whole thing is not as effective as we are led.

You are insinuating that a random molecule's off-target effects are going to compare in magnitude to that of one specifically designed for that purpose. There is no evidence that retinoic acid even has this effect in the skin/dermal papilla, much less that it would be comparable in efficacy to BAY.

 

[Norwood-null-by-2021]

It can take 10-20 years for the drug to reach the market. If it should come on the market at all. So anyone who believes in this PRL theory would do well to look for natural remedies that block the PRL receptors instead of waiting 20 years for the drug.

 

[trialAcc]

It can take 10-20 years for the drug to reach the market. If it should come on the market at all. So anyone who believes in this PRL theory would do well to look for natural remedies that block the PRL receptors instead of waiting 20 years for the drug.

That average number is inclusive of pre-clinical research, this drug is already passed phase 1 trials.

If Bayer/Hope Med want to drive this to market (especially in China) they can do so in under 2 years. 18 months for phase 2 and 3, 6~ months inbetween and for NDA. Look at what Kintor is doing with their topical AA that finished phase 1 trials in 2020. They have an expected launch of 2022.

 

[nick123]

It can take 10-20 years for the drug to reach the market. If it should come on the market at all. So anyone who believes in this PRL theory would do well to look for natural remedies that block the PRL receptors instead of waiting 20 years for the drug.

Yeah, 10-20 years if your company name is Cassiopea.

 

[Throwaway94]

It can take 10-20 years for the drug to reach the market. If it should come on the market at all. So anyone who believes in this PRL theory would do well to look for natural remedies that block the PRL receptors instead of waiting 20 years for the drug.

Why would we look for natural remedies that block the PRP receptor when we can scour patents for potent pharmaceuticals and have Chinese labs synthesise them for us

 

[coolio]

IMO any natural remedy that made a legit dent in androgenic loss would be known already. There was never a time in recorded history where people weren't frustrated about hair loss. They talked about it thousands of years ago.

It's like hoping that there is an unknown natural fix to reverse skin wrinkles. Umm, no. Anything that makes a visible difference is already going to be known.

 

[Dimitri001]

IMO any natural remedy that made a legit dent in androgenic loss would be known already. There was never a time in recorded history where people weren't frustrated about hair loss. They talked about it thousands of years ago.

It's like hoping that there is an unknown natural fix to reverse skin wrinkles. Umm, no. Anything that makes a visible difference is already going to be known.

Not that I'm arguing for either approach, but wasn't Ginseng a recent discovery? I mean, maybe it had been used in traditional medicine in China or something, but it wasn't brought to our attention until recently.

 

[trialAcc]

IMO any natural remedy that made a legit dent in androgenic loss would be known already. There was never a time in recorded history where people weren't frustrated about hair loss. They talked about it thousands of years ago.

It's like hoping that there is an unknown natural fix to reverse skin wrinkles. Umm, no. Anything that makes a visible difference is already going to be known.

This is basically a prime example of the largest logical fallacy and reason people don't take natural remedies/compounds as serious they should. There is no realistic or imaginable way that every compound/remedy has been used and trailed on the scalp or orally at the length that would be required to actually realize that it was working. Even if it was, were talking about pre-modern communication eras where the knowledge would have died out very quickly and perhaps not even have been shared.

Even with modern standards and clear cut medical guidance that things like minoxidil and finasteride don't hit their peak efficacy until 1 year plus, this forum and every forum like it is full of people who come to cry that finasteride doesn't work for them after 4 months. You think that would be different in the past with random natural remedies?

 

[Gegen]

This is basically a prime example of the largest logical fallacy and reason people don't take natural remedies/compounds as serious they should. There is no realistic or imaginable way that every compound/remedy has been used and trailed on the scalp or orally at the length that would be required to actually realize that it was working. Even if it was, were talking about pre-modern communication eras where the knowledge would have died out very quickly and perhaps not even have been shared.

Even with modern standards and clear cut medical guidance that things like minoxidil and finasteride don't hit their peak efficacy until 1 year plus, this forum and every forum like it is full of people who come to cry that finasteride doesn't work for them after 4 months. You think that would be different in the past with random natural remedies?

This.

+ don't forget that we have tons of microorganisms to discover. And a lot of pharmacological compounds come from these.

 

[coolio]

This is basically a prime example of the largest logical fallacy and reason people don't take natural remedies/compounds as serious they should. There is no realistic or imaginable way that every compound/remedy has been used and trailed on the scalp or orally at the length that would be required to actually realize that it was working. Even if it was, were talking about pre-modern communication eras where the knowledge would have died out very quickly and perhaps not even have been shared.

Even with modern standards and clear cut medical guidance that things like minoxidil and finasteride don't hit their peak efficacy until 1 year plus, this forum and every forum like it is full of people who come to cry that finasteride doesn't work for them after 4 months. You think that would be different in the past with random natural remedies?

How do you KNOW that there isn't a natural substance to smear onto the stump of a severed limb, and make it regrow? How are you sure it doesn't exist?

Same logic.


Pre-industrial humans were pretty goddamn good at discovering natural cures. It's all they had. They paid attention to anything that did any good at all for any problem. Their standards for improvement were practically nil.

They discovered that certain essential oils (Lavender, Tea Tree, etc) help hair. Do you realize how minor the impact of that stuff is? And yet it was discovered and pretty well known.

 

[trialAcc]

How do you KNOW that there isn't a natural substance to smear onto the stump of a severed limb, and make it regrow? How are you sure it doesn't exist?

Same logic.


Pre-industrial humans were pretty goddamn good at discovering natural cures. It's all they had. They paid attention to anything that did any good at all for any problem. Their standards for improvement were practically nil.

They discovered that certain essential oils (Lavender, Tea Tree, etc) help hair. Do you realize how minor the impact of that stuff is? And yet it was discovered and pretty well known.

How is that the same logic? One is impossible, the other is not.

I'm also not saying that they didn't try anything at all, just not everything in depth.

 

[coolio]

How is that the same logic? One is impossible, the other is not.

What makes you think it's possible to reverse a significant amount of androgenic hair loss? Show me a case that didn't involve modern science.

 

[trialAcc]

What makes you think it's possible to reverse a significant amount of androgenic hair loss? Show me a case that didn't involve modern science.

Why does it matter if it's "modern science" or not? If we know the follicles are not fully dead then it clearly can be reversed.

 

[coolio]

Why does it matter if it's "modern science" or not? If we know the follicles are not fully dead then it clearly can be reversed.

Modern science can do many things that natural cures cannot. Re-attaching severed limbs. Open body surgery without dying of infection. Etc.

Let's weigh the evidence for & against an unknown natural treatment (that is worth using):
One one side, the last 10,000 years of human civilization has not been able to find anything. And on the other side, with the benefit of modern research, there is . . . zip. Nothing been found. There still isn't even any evidence to suggest it might exist.

One could say "it's impossible to prove a negative" but IMO the case for the negative is pretty strong here.

I absolutely do believe mankind will invent a better treatment in the next few decades. But it's gonna require something that was not available to mankind until recently.