Very Impressive Dermarolling And Minxodil Results - From Tressless

[300]

Some people have something productive to offer, including you, but you haven't offered anything productive in many posts now, you are just being bitter because I disagreed with you. Sorry boyo but I'm allowed to disagree.

Bitter about what?I even commented you about your knowledge on the subject of hair loss.I told you that my knowledge is inferior to yours

 

[cryingariver]

all this fighting. I just want my full head of hair back

 

[Armando Jose]

Sebum flow theory is worse than craniofacial theory, yet you persist with it for decades without convincing a single person of your ideas and ignoring every point that dispels your theory. Here's a link if anyone is interested in reading more about the problems with sebum theory. https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...ersons-are-more-vulnerable-to-hairloss.29109/

Good for the link, 15 years ago and it seem that we are not progressed yet

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/what-type-of-persons-are-more-vulnerable-to-hairloss.29109/post-790395

And a lot of interesting disscusions, ....
The important key pointed to Bryan

• Jun 6, 2007

• Add bookmark
• #172

Bryan wrote:

Actually, do we even know for a FACT that there are significantly fewer androgen receptors in pre-pubertal hair follicle cells? It would seem like a fairly safe bet, but nevertheless I'd like to see some actual scientific evidence for it. The only study I've ever heard of having anything at all to do with the general level of androgenic stimulus in scalp hair follicles of pre-pubertal humans is the one Armando cited recently, in which a doctor measured levels of androgens in the hair roots of children. But as far as I know, there was no measurement of androgen receptors.

This is an important issue in order to clear all doubts, an study in healthy scalp hairs in prepubertal in both sexes and in two areas of head, including sebum, steroids and androgen receptors. Is it so difficult to make?

Armando

 

[Intrigued77777777]

Sebum flow theory is worse than craniofacial theory, yet you persist with it for decades without convincing a single person of your ideas and ignoring every point that dispels your theory. Here's a link if anyone is interested in reading more about the problems with sebum theory. https://www.hairlosstalk.com/intera...ersons-are-more-vulnerable-to-hairloss.29109/

Whatever it is, it's something which progresses from follicle to follicle. I've grown a lot of hair on my temples, but new hair is always growing adjacent to existing hair. What i mean is it doesn't "jump" 1cm and new hair appears so far away.

I heard on (the Australian hair transplant clinic podcast on Youtube?) something about cells transmit signals to adjacent cells. I think baldness is most-likely related to this.

 

[Armando Jose]

Whatever it is, it's something which progresses from follicle to follicle

good observation

 

[Intrigued77777777]

good observation

I assume you're being sarcastic but it's actually an important point.

It means a follicle's ability to grow seems dependent on nearby follicles.

 

[pegasus2]

Whatever it is, it's something which progresses from follicle to follicle. I've grown a lot of hair on my temples, but new hair is always growing adjacent to existing hair. What i mean is it doesn't "jump" 1cm and new hair appears so far away.

I heard on (the Australian hair transplant clinic podcast on Youtube?) something about cells transmit signals to adjacent cells. I think baldness is most-likely related to this.

Quorum sensing. It plays a role, but it's not causing hair loss. If you implant a healthy hair from the back of the head to the center of your bald spot it will grow healthy for life in most cases despite being surrounded by miniaturized hairs.

 

[pegasus2]

Good for the link, 15 years ago and it seem that we are not progressed yet

https://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/threads/what-type-of-persons-are-more-vulnerable-to-hairloss.29109/post-790395

And a lot of interesting disscusions, ....
The important key pointed to Bryan

• Jun 6, 2007

• Add bookmark
• #172

Bryan wrote:

This is an important issue in order to clear all doubts, an study in healthy scalp hairs in prepubertal in both sexes and in two areas of head, including sebum, steroids and androgen receptors. Is it so difficult to make?

Armando

Hair loss is the red-headed stepchild of research. It is apparently very difficult to get the basic research done

 

[Armando Jose]

I assume you're being sarcastic but it's actually an important point.

It means a follicle's ability to grow seems dependent on nearby follicles.

Yes, exactly it is my thought, then whorl in the crown area and front line are more prone to suffer common baldness, because they are more "solitaries" with less contact among them

 

[Armando Jose]

Hair loss is the red-headed stepchild of research. It is apparently very difficult to get the basic research done

But only checking sebum in scalp prepubertal coul be a huge advance

 

[John Difool]

But only checking sebum in scalp prepubertal coul be a huge advance

Try to find a dermatologist who would do that.

 

[Kagaho]

But only checking sebum in scalp prepubertal coul be a huge advance

Yeah, definitely something HF biologists cant wait for given the monumental consequences this complex endeavor can bring to our current understanding of the etiology of Androgenetic Alopecia.

Cmonn, Armando... Yore like 70, Oropelum guy. Time for a break now

 

[John Difool]

Hey @Pigeon how is your hope on fevipiprant going these days. You were a big fan back then? I am asking because I am considering a TM gb with the Chinese scam labs.

 

[vandun3]

Another one (also taking finasteride):

https://www.reddit.com/r/tressless/comments/s209w7

Damn, wish i didn't get nasty sides from minoxidil

 

[vandun3]

Yes fevi still looks like an interesting angle, another private forum also had a gb not long ago but I haven't seen any results yet.

What sides did you get?

light headedness/headache/brainfog, water retention especially in joints, decent amount of gastric distress. tried it a few times over the last 5 years or so and it's always the same unfortunately

 

[Intrigued77777777]

Anyone here doing 1.5mm weekly and 0.5mm for Minoxidil absorption a couple of days during the week?

If not, is this alright to do?

 

[John Difool]

.You need minoxidil twice a day, and the wounding for absorption doesn't work like that since wounds close the upper skin layer in hours.So unless you enjoy inflicting yourself unnecessary pain, this additional wounding is useless.

 

[BurningCoals]

I believe 1x/day for minoxidil is enough because of its half life.

And another one, this guys use topical finasteride/minoxidil

https://www.reddit.com/r/tressless/comments/s6v04b

Went from dad to son lol

 

[Armando Jose]

I believe 1x/day for minoxidil is enough because of its half life.

And another one, this guys use topical finasteride/minoxidil + biweekly needling

https://www.reddit.com/r/tressless/comments/s6v04b

"I use to be on oral finasteride. And topical min. Had sides. Quit for a couple years. Topical finasteride/min came out from hims and I jumped on that and here we are!"

I concur with W. Rassman comment,
"The before picture has hair that is very short. Your blonde hair makes it difficult to analyze the before picture but the after picture shows a full head of hair. I wonder how much of that hair was there before?"

 

[coolio]

That's a 1980s result and we still call it encouraging in 2022.

Hair loss treatment is such a f*****g joke.