I will give you my opinion about topic spironolactone.
In my point of view,
it doesn´t work.
Why?
Well, the background theory is correct. Yes, it is a potent antiandrogen (many transgenders use it) and protects the folicles from DHT. The problem is .. Well, it doesn´t get to work at the folicle at all - after being absorbed, is fastly metabolized, so that makes it pretty much .. USELESS.
I think there are many antiandrogens that prevent DHT action. The problem is ALWAYS the same. Ther is not enough absortion, they don´t get to work in the folicle time enough.
Curiously I sustain my theory with a big spironolactone "supporter" Dr. Lee interview:
http://www.hairlosssucks.com/newsletter ... icle08.htm
Somewhere at the end he tells the inneficiency truth about ALL topical antiandrogens (spironolactone included obviously). What he doesn´t realize is he spoke against himself, because he sells spironolactone.
Interviewer:
Why is it so hard for us to make something work *locally* in a topical formulation? Is it an issue of not enough absorption? Is it an issue of too much absorption which results in the active ingredient being "washed" away by the bloodstream?
DR LEE:
Why don't topicals work as well? It's for many reasons. One reason is that it doesn't stay in the skin long enough. Another problem is absorption (...)
Interviewer:
So the goal for researchers as far as finding topical DHT inhibitors should be a focus more so on finding one that, once absorbed, isn't metabolized so quickly?
Dr. Lee: Yes. One that doesn't get carried away by the circulatory system. I have been doing a lot of work with a Biochemist in the Bay Area using liposome's, and that works very well at keeping the active ingredients stationary in the scalp once absorbed, but the expenses involved make it prohibitive. So yes, we're still looking for the holy grail.
Interviewer: So why is it that spironolactone still works even though, as you mentioned, it gets metabolized so quickly?
(DR LEE realized now the he was caught in his own trap)
Dr. Lee: It absorbs into the skin and blocks the receptor site. Anything that gets into the bloodstream, has already been degraded.
(Crapy answer!! This was very contradictive!)
Adding to this contradictive interview, I have another group of questions:
- If it was effective as websites claim, why Dr lee is still working in an "efficient topical"?
- If it is used since the 80´s, why there aren´t sufficient studies on male pattern baldness sufferers? It isn´t that hard, a simple 2 year study on a 10 male pattern baldness group using spironolactone ALONE would be great to clear our minds.
- If it is used since the 80´s, why is not popular? We google the entire world and we find very few info.
- About the "i believe it works, but only stops MBP it doesn´t regrow" theory in this thread .. Well that seems very "strange", doesn´t it? Any medicin that stops male pattern baldness alows some regrowth in some users, because the folicles are allowed to "breathe" from DHT destroying action, so why is spironolactone different in this area?
The answer seems clear to me, spironolactone is inneficient, and scientific community have realized it. Otherwise this would be a very talked and researched product!
Anyway this is MY OPINION. It may very well be a bunch od bullsh# but at least that´s what I think.
Cheers