question about revivogen

[Red Rose]

Interview with Dr Lee

"Tricomin: The basis of treatment with Tricomin is the "Triamino Copper Nutritional Complex", a mixture of copper peptides. Copper, like zinc and sulfur and many other elements are essential in the healthy growth of the hair follicles, but I'm not convinced that it stimulates hair growth or is of any specific benefit in the treatment of male pattern baldness."

http://www.hairlosshelp.com/qna/Detail. ... d=tricomin

and

"There is no claim or evidence that Tricomin is beneficial specifically for male pattern baldness, but it may be helpful in many cases."

http://www.hairlosshelp.com/qna/Detail. ... d=tricomin

 

[Cassin]

Interview with Dr Lee

"Tricomin: The basis of treatment with Tricomin is the "Triamino Copper Nutritional Complex", a mixture of copper peptides. Copper, like zinc and sulfur and many other elements are essential in the healthy growth of the hair follicles, but I'm not convinced that it stimulates hair growth or is of any specific benefit in the treatment of male pattern baldness."

http://www.hairlosshelp.com/qna/Detail. ... d=tricomin

and

"There is no claim or evidence that Tricomin is beneficial specifically for male pattern baldness, but it may be helpful in many cases."

http://www.hairlosshelp.com/qna/Detail. ... d=tricomin

Very vague comment that tries to sound specific don't you think? But falls very short once you read it a few times and count all of the holes.

Dr Lee has yet to clearly clarify to me in emails or to any other poster exactly why he thinks that way.

 

[Cassin]

Yeah I agree that to some extent I am chasing tails so to completely clarify my position, I do not think that CPs will produce better results in conjunction with the Big 3 than revivogen w/Big 3 :lol:

I think relevance comes into play here on why the user is using either product exactly, but good point.

 

[Red Rose]

Very vague comment that tries to sound specific don't you think? But falls very short once you read it a few times and count all of the holes.

Dr Lee has yet to clearly clarify to me in emails or to any other poster exactly why he thinks that way.

Yes I agree. Could it be anything to do with business 101? :wink:

 

[Cassin]

Yes I agree. Could it be anything to do with business 101? :wink:

Yeah in the world of hairloss it seems like Dr Lee has good ethics and really wants to help us, but in the end he is still a business man. I use some of Dr Lees products, I just find some of his comments very weird, especially when it comes to Copper-Peptides. The man writes them off and is never clear as to why.

EDIT:

tobyfan

Sorry to hijack your thread, thats pretty much what happens on these forums after a few pages.

 

[Bryan]

I find this whole discussion of "Revivogen versus copper-peptides" to be both interesting and amusing! I personally don't want to take sides on it myself, because there just isn't enough evidence on either approach to draw any firm conclusions about which is better. However, I partially agree and partially disagree with certain statements made on BOTH sides. Here are some general comments about the problems I have with what's been said, in no particular order:

1) The poster "stax" repeated once again that bit about how Propecia only reduces scalp DHT by around 38%. Folks, PLEASE stop repeating numbers like that, as if they mean anything at all!! I can show you a recent study that was done by some heavy-hitters in the field of dermatology, and the figure they got was higher, like around 70% or so. We don't really know what the correct number is, because of this conflicting data. Furthermore, it may not really even be particularly relevant, for technical reasons I don't feel like going into right now.

2) There is MORE than just that one preliminary Tricomin trial which supports the use of copper-peptides for hairloss. I have previously posted that set of three studies which tested various copper-peptides in humans, fuzzy rats, and mice. Should I post them again? People tend to have short memories on hairloss sites! :wink:

3) That study on fatty acids which was cited earlier DEFINITELY was in vivo! They were applied topically to living, breathing hamsters! Furthermore, the test didn't measure the effect on "internal organs", it measured the effect on the flank organs, which are masses of sebaceous glands beneath the skin surface. It _did_ demonstrate a potent, nearly castration-like inhibition of those androgen-sensitive structures in the skin. And it even noted an inhibitory effect on the hamsters hair follicles (remember, hamster fur would presumably be the equivalent of body hair)! Also, some of those same researchers did a small test of topical GLA (gamma-linolenic acid) on a HUMAN test subject, and found that it was able to very significantly reduce his sebum production. Yes, I know: that effect was on the sebaceous gland and not the hair itself, but nevertheless it's a clear and significant demonstration that topical fatty acids can get to and affect the pilosebaceous unit. While really hard evidence for Revivogen of the type that we all want is still lacking, by no means does it seem like that much of a stretch to think that it probably does work for hairloss, at least to some degree. The scientific rationale seems sound, and is supported by both the in vivo and in vitro evidence that we do have.

Bryan

 

[mvpsoft]

Dr. Lee has a lot of good things to say, and he has contributed greatly with his Xandrox products. But when it comes to copper peptides, he has a blind spot, he simply either isn't aware of the evidence or perhaps hasn't investigated it fully.

Pickart has some blind spots too, although not when it comes to cu's. He has 40 years of research on them, and when he speaks on what they do, he is authoritative. His income is mostly derived from selling skin care products, not hair products, and he really isn't a great businessman. When he talks about the research on copper peptides, he's not hawking product. He's a researcher first.

I should say that I don't dislike Revivogen. I have been using it, and although I am discontinuing doing so, that's because my scalp simply can't get used to the product, and I can't continue to put up with the irritation. But the evidence for copper peptides is now so strong, that it's approaching the evidence for the big three. It's not there, but the evidence for cu's as a regrowth agent is greater than the evidence for any other treatment after the big three, and Revivogen simply isn't in that category. Unfortunately, the maker of Revivogen does not seem interested in conduding the rigorous testing and studies necessary for compelling clinical proof.

 

[mvpsoft]

3) That study on fatty acids which was cited earlier DEFINITELY was in vivo! They were applied topically to living, breathing hamsters! Furthermore, the test didn't measure the effect on "internal organs", it measured the effect on the flank organs, which are masses of sebaceous glands beneath the skin surface. It _did_ demonstrate a potent, nearly castration-like inhibition of those androgen-sensitive structures in the skin. And it even noted an inhibitory effect on the hamsters hair follicles (remember, hamster fur would presumably be the equivalent of body hair)! Also, some of those same researchers did a small test of topical GLA (gamma-linolenic acid) on a HUMAN test subject, and found that it was able to very significantly reduce his sebum production. Yes, I know: that effect was on the sebaceous gland and not the hair itself, but nevertheless it's a clear and significant demonstration that topical fatty acids can get to and affect the pilosebaceous unit. While really hard evidence for Revivogen of the type that we all want is still lacking, by no means does it seem like that much of a stretch to think that it probably does work for hairloss, at least to some degree. The scientific rationale seems sound, and is supported by both the in vivo and in vitro evidence that we do have.

Thanks for clarifying that for me. The extrapolation to being a regrowth agent is thus smaller than I suspected, but it's still an extrapolation. Copper peptides, OTOH, have directly generated regrowth in studies.

 

[Cassin]

Bryan you have stated before that CP's should be applied to the scalp before Minoxidil. Why is that?

Dr Pickart seems to think otherwise. He states that they should be applied "about 5 to 15 minutes after Minoxidil has been used and has had time to dry."

Now I am assuming it has been awhile since Dr Pickart has tried Minoxidil so we can assume he means the drying time of 2% (or Dr Lees 5%) so lets assume as well that we can adjust that to mean 1 to 2 hours for typical 5% Minoxidil.

EDIT: I have been using them in opposite order for awhile now with success. Just as Dr Pickart states.

 

[Bryan]

Interview with Dr Lee

"Tricomin: The basis of treatment with Tricomin is the 'Triamino Copper Nutritional Complex', a mixture of copper peptides..."

Dr. Lee is wrong: Tricomin isn't a "mixture" of copper-peptides, it's a single SPECIFIC copper-peptide. It's Folligen which is a mixture of various peptides.

Dr. Lee should hire me as his proofreader!

Bryan

 

[Red Rose]

there just isn't enough evidence on either approach to draw any firm conclusions about which is better.
Bryan

Right we'll leave it at that then.

Who would I be to argue with Bryan?! :lol:

BTW I don't understand the rationale of applying CPs before minoxidil.

 

[stax]

Bryan, i was wondering if your still using Proxiphen-N and are you still maintaing all your hair like in those pics i saw of you? I want to use prescription Proxiphen and i was wondering what the % of spironolactone and Minoxidil is in the Prescription Proxiphen? Should i still use Xandrox 15 and Xandrox 5 while using Proxiphen? If you could help me out that would be greatly appreciated.Thanks.

 

[viperfish]

Is not proxiphen-n pretty much copper and some other growth stimulant?? Not to put down Dr. Proctor's products, but your basically getting 2 ounces of the stuff for $30. Would it not be better to use the American Crew Cu peptides or Folligen for a fraction of the price? Is the cu in Dr. Proctor's proxiphen-n a specific peptide or is it a mix of peptides like folligen? Bryan? Anyone?

 

[mvpsoft]

Bryan you have stated before that CP's should be applied to the scalp before Minoxidil. Why is that?

Dr Pickart seems to think otherwise. He states that they should be applied "about 5 to 15 minutes after Minoxidil has been used and has had time to dry."

Now I am assuming it has been awhile since Dr Pickart has tried Minoxidil so we can assume he means the drying time of 2% (or Dr Lees 5%) so lets assume as well that we can adjust that to mean 1 to 2 hours for typical 5% Minoxidil.

EDIT: I have been using them in opposite order for awhile now with success. Just as Dr Pickart states.

FWIW, I have been using cu's first, wait a few minutes, then minoxidil, also with success. Perhaps it doesn't matter in which order you apply them.

 

[Bryan]

Bryan you have stated before that CP's should be applied to the scalp before Minoxidil. Why is that?

FWIW, I have been using cu's first, wait a few minutes, then minoxidil, also with success. Perhaps it doesn't matter in which order you apply them.

Dr. Proctor has stated that in general, it probably doesn't make much difference in what order you apply topicals. However, it's been my own personal conceit for a long time that maybe you should apply CP's prior to minoxidil for the following admittedly speculative reasons:

1) I used to worry that minoxidil would cause the release of nitric oxide, which in turn could react with superoxide to form the VERY harmful peroxynitrite. I figured that if you applied the CP's first, they would destroy the superoxide immediately, allowing minoxidil to be used a short time later with complete safety. However, since then Dr. Proctor has said that minoxidil doesn't cause the release of nitric oxide and therefore doesn't produce peroxynitrite, so I guess that line of reasoning is a non-issue! :hairy:

2) There still remains the fact that after you apply topical minoxidil, some of it sits around on the scalp for a fair amount of time (hours, possibly) as a saturated solution of minoxidil in propylene glycol. If you go apply another watery solution on top of it a short while later, even if your scalp appears to be relatively "dry" (see my other post on that issue in another thread) and rub it in well, I fear that you might ruin or interfere with some of that remaining minoxidil that's sitting there. I emphasize that I can't PROVE that would happen, it just seems like a better idea to me to apply a watery product like Tricomin or Folligen FIRST, then wait a few minutes for it to dry, then go ahead and apply your minoxidil. BTW, there was a study several years ago which used radioactive minoxidil to trace what happens to it when you apply it topically to your scalp! To their surprise, they found that MOST of it (>50%) went unaccounted for, even after collecting all they could from the urine and feces, and from pillows and bedsheets, etc. Their explanation was that a lot of it is lost from the scalp due to things like air currents blowing on it, people scratching their heads or combing their hair, etc. Now you can see why I don't like the idea of slapping another topical solution on top of minoxidil a while later and rubbing it in! :wink:

Bryan

 

[viperfish]

I wish revivogen would make a separate formula with just some of the more "proven" ingredients, like those "free" fatty acids. Maybe throw those procyanidin oligomers in too. If they took all the other ingredients in the formula, like azelaic acid that have only been shown to be effective in-vitro, I would consider using it again. By removing some of these other ingredients the formula might be easier to apply and less harsh on the scalp. I think azelaic acid might be one of the main ingredients causing the irritation that many associate with revivogen. Until then, I would not apply revivogen to my scalp again and hence would much rather use the cu peptides.

 

[Red Rose]

Here's a study on the suppression of sebum excretion in male human foreheads using either topical GLA or topical EGCG. I think this study taken together with the studies by Liang and Liao would strongly suggest that topcial GLA has a beneficial effect on humans in terms of inhibition of 5a-reductase.

In terms of Revivogen, I am still trying to find out whether the concentration of fatty acids used in the Liang and Liao study on the hamster flank organs is similar to the concentration of fatty acids in the product itself. I think I may have seen the 40% figure floating around
somewhere before but I don't know.

Effects of Fatty Acids and Catechins on Sebum Production in a Human Model

Topical antiandrogenic activity of several fatty acid and catechin was first evaluated in the hamster flank organ assay or the rat assay. To further confirm the effectiveness of antiandrogenic compounds and suitability for human use, tests were performed on a human male subject. The ideal compounds for human treatment are those that are topically and locally active but do not show systemic antiandrogenic activity, especially in the cases involving young males. In the following example, two classes of compounds were tested by measuring sebum secretion from the forehead of an adult male treated topically.

A. METHODS

1. Determination of Forehead Sebum Production

A 63-year old Asian male volunteer was used to test and analyze sebum production from the forehead region. The forehead was washed thoroughly by soap twice and cleaned by 70% isopropyl alcohol twice. Sebum production was measured 30 to 60 minutes later by a sebum meter (Courage/Khazaka Electronic GmbH, Germany). The sebum meter tape probe (7 mm x 8 mm) covered 56 mm<2 &rt; area in PAGE 53 Pat. No. 5605929, *

each measurement. Ten measurements were made within the 4 cm square area (16 cm<2&rt; ) located at the middle of the left or right side forehead between the eyebrow and the hair line.

The sebum meter detected the difference in the transparency of the tape before and after the tape was placed on the forehead for 30 seconds and expressed the difference in an arbitrary number (S-value) between 0 to 300 (or higher). S-values of sebum accumulated on the foreheads of men are usually 200 to 300. Skin surface on hands usually showed a very low number (5 to 20). The S-value for forehead immediately after washing was less than 5. For men, the S-value gradually increased to about 50 within 30 minutes after washing and reached 100 to 200 in 45 minutes to 55 minutes.

To determine the rate of sebum production, the left and the right forehead areas were measured alternatively and each time at the comparable areas on the two sides. Ten measurements on each side (i.e., 20 measurements for two sides) could take about 15-20 minutes and the sebum-values ranged between 30 to 200. The S-values were different considerably at different areas of the forehead and could be influenced by environmental, including weather, diet, and physiological conditions. However, the ratio of the total S-value (the sum of 10 measurements) for the left and the total S-value for the right forehead was constant. For the Asian male tested in this experiment, the L/R ratios measured over a six month's period was within 1.15 to 1.38 if the S-values were determined 30 to 50 minutes after the forehead was washed thoroughly. Therefore, compounds applied to the left forehead that reduced the L/R ratio to lower than 1.1 were considered as topically active agents for suppression of sebum production.

B. RESULTS

1. gamma -LA Inhibition of Human Forehead Sebum

In the experiment shown in FIG. 24, 0.2 ml of borage oil (containing 18% of gamma LA) in a gel capsule was applied to the left forehead twice daily for 23 days. During this period, L/R ratio reduced from 1.28 0.03 down to 1.05 0.01. After the borage oil treatment was stopped, the L/R ratio returned to 1.20 0.14. The effect of borage oil on the sebum production on the left forehead was relatively small, possibly due to the fact that most gamma LA in the borage oil was in the form of triglyceride that did not inhibit 5 alpha -reductase (see Table 2). Free acid released from the glyceride by nonenzymic or enzymic action was probably responsible for the effect.

After the borage oil application was stopped and the L/R ratio recovered to 1.33, 20 mg of pure gamma -LA was applied to the left forehead twice each day for 6 days. The L/R ratio decreased to 0.22 during this period. After the gamma -LA application was stopped, the L/R ratio recovered slowly to 1.20 0.14 over the period of 16 days. The finding clearly showed that gamma -LA was superior than borage oil in quickly suppressing sebum production from forehead of a human male subject.

2. Catechin Inhibition of Human Forehead Sebum Production

Twenty mg of ( - )epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) in 0.2 ml 70% ethanol was applied to the left forehead twice a day for 6 days (FIG. 25). The L/R ratio decrease from 1.20 0.02 to 0.71 0.04 during this period. After the EGCG treatment was stopped, the L/R ratio gradually recovered to 1.19 0.02 PAGE 54 Pat. No. 5605929, *

within 16 days. Subsequent treatment of the left forehead with 20 mg ( - )epicatechin in 0.2 ml 70% ethanol twice a day for 6 days reduced the L/R ratio to 1.02 0.1. After the application was stopped, the L/R ratio gradually increased to the normal value of 1.21 0.01 in 10 days. Clearly EGCG was more effective in reducing the sebum production from forehead than ( - )epicatechin

 

[Bryan]

Here's a study on the suppression of sebum excretion in male human foreheads using either topical GLA or topical EGCG. I think this study taken together with the studies by Liang and Liao would strongly suggest that topcial GLA has a beneficial effect on humans in terms of inhibition of 5a-reductase.

Thanks for posting that again! I think it's important for people to understand that the use of topical fatty acids to inhibit 5a-reductase and even possibly help block androgen receptors is more than just an idle theoretical proposition! Real-world tests in both animals and humans back it up.

In terms of Revivogen, I am still trying to find out whether the concentration of fatty acids used in the Liang and Liao study on the hamster flank organs is similar to the concentration of fatty acids in the product itself. I think I may have seen the 40% figure floating around somewhere before but I don't know.

I believe they ARE very similar. The concentration used in the hamster tests varied a bit, if I remember correctly: most of them were 20% solutions in ethanol, but I believe one of the tests involved a 40% solution. I _believe_ that Revivogen has about a 20% fatty acid content. I hope I'm remembering that correctly.

Bryan

 

[stax]

So do we all agree that Revivogen is a effective product to use in our fight against hairloss? Is the dosages in Revivogen enough to be effective?

 

[Bryan]

I think all we can agree on is that there is a sound scientific rationale for thinking that it COULD be an effective product! :lol:

Bryan