Your entire post had absolutely nothing to do with the single question I posed to you... until the very end. So i will reply to that.
nesta said:
it´s wrong to say that the hair is dependent on topical anti DHT, the hair depends on not being attacked byt DHT.
Thats your argument??????????????? You are playing a game of semantics and nothing more. You know exactly what I and everyone else is saying here, and you know its right because you just acknowledged it in your post:
1. You use something that stops the degradation process of DHT
2. The hair benefits
3. The hair continues to "BENEFIT" as long as you use it
4. You take away that DHT inhibitor
5. The hair suffers
That is called DEPENDENCE.
Maybe our entire problem here is your understanding of the definition of dependence.
You just acknowledged that the hair will suffer without the DHT inhibitor but you say that doesnt equate to dependence.
Not only is the phrasing irrelevant, its wrong.
Why ? Because the result is the same. The hair WILL SUFFER in the absence of the DHT inhibitor. Therefore you MUST CONTINUE to use it in order for the hair not to suffer. You cannot STOP using the treatment if you want to maintain gains you've made on it. I have never seen someone nitpick an irrelevant point so much in my life.
nesta said:
Bottom line is - No there is no dependence when it comes to topcials like spironolactone and revivogen. Everytime you use them you will give your follicles a helping hand but they won´t be dependent. However they will always be dependent on as little DHT in the scalp as possible but how does that differ from when you are not using a topical?
Yeah the problem here is that you don't know what dependence means. Or you've created your own definition.
Any treatment which benefits, reverses, or stops the process of hair loss MUST BE CONTINUED in order to continue seeing benefit, reversal, or stopped hair loss. Period. This is a solid scientific fact that cannot be argued with.
Just for kicks and giggles I looked up the definition of "Dependence". Ironic what Definition # 1 says:
"The state of being dependent, as for support."
As for ....... what? Support? Sounds to me like something that RELIES on something for support, like a follicle relying on a DHT inhibitor for support of its growth processes ... is dependent.
Definition # 2:
"Trust; reliance"
Again, ironically descriptive of a Follicle benefitting from a DHT inhibitor isn't it? Again, dependence. You imply that the need to be ACTING in some fashion implies dependence. The very definition of dependence shows a passive relationship, just like a hair being free to grow in the absence of DHT.
Definition # 3:
"The state of being determined, influenced, or controlled by something else"
Finally, way down the list you see something more reminiscent of Minoxidil and the follicle. An action mode. Controll. Influence. Growth stimulation. Both ways are still considered "Dependence" however. Passive or agressive.
HairLossTalk.com