What happens if you get prostate cancer

[Bryan]

Bryan-

Is this true that even someone in say his mid twenties that has not started male pattern baldness yet could get in finas and it would prevent it from ever starting at all?? If this is so I wish I would have known this 1 year ago right before I had the first few early signs????

I won't go way out on a limb and claim that it will ABSOLUTELY POSITIVELY stop future balding, but I do think that starting it before male pattern baldness begins is a powerful step in the right direction. And the earlier, the better! :wink:

 

[Guest]

I do agree, though, that other androgens probably also have an effect on hair follicles. I find it amusing that on all the hairloss sites, the chatter is constantly DHT this, DHT that! :wink:

but if dht truly does have 30 times the affinity for the androgen receptor than the other ones, then they shouldnt really have a noticeable visual impact on hair

 

[Jacobo]

but if dht truly does have 30 times the affinity for the androgen receptor than the other ones, then they shouldnt really have a noticeable visual impact on hair

But it has that visual impact in some people. I have been in internals for 8 years, and I was going to give up. Thanks to HairLossTalk.com I discover Proxiphen and spironolactone. The improvement is clear. I will do a full review when 6 months on.

If you think how many different degrees of balding, from NW6 at 30 years old to NW3 at 50 on people without taking internals, you will say that there is something else apart from DHT. My brother doesn't take any internals, is older than me and has a full head of hair. I don't think that his DHT level is lower than mine (I still take internals, and after this thread, I will do for a loooong time)

Bottom line, for you it might be enough to lower DHT, but for some people (or in some hair areas) is not enough. Or I don't understand anything because I am trying to digest to much information too quick here, which is a possibility :hairy:

 

[Guest]

My brother doesn't take any internals, is older than me and has a full head of hair. I don't think that his DHT level is lower than mine (I still take internals, and after this thread, I will do for a loooong time)

You cannot be serious, Jacobo. You think this proves that the other androgens cause damage? They may very well in genetically susceptible individuals. Read those last three words again in my previous sentence: genetically susceptible individuals. Your brother may very well have inherited different hair genes than you did. His DHT levels could be identical to yours, lower than yours, or higher- it really is irrelevant, because unless he has the genetic susceptibility to the androgens, he'll keep his hair.

 

[Jacobo]

You cannot be serious, Jacobo.

I was trying to, but I realize I made a mess of myself in my last post, I cannot see what does my brother have to do with all of this. Maybe he is just a lucky bast*rd (actually, that could be literally the reason he doesn't lose hair at all :lol: )

I ll try to do the right question now: You think that other androgens shouldn't have noticeable visual impact on hairloss, due to that weak binding affinity. Is not possible that Testosterone is enough to make hair fall without DHT at all? Do you think that there is not point at all on using spironolactone if you are taking internals? (Read those last 43 words again in my last previous sentence )

Seriously, Michael Barry and Bryan are spironolactone believers (to certain extent), but if they believe it does some work against hairloss, it won't be because it competes with DHT (too weak AFAIK), then it has to work competing against T and other androgens. Is that a prove that without spironolactone then, the other androgens were making hair fall of?

I am still deciding if carrying on using spironolactone at night, or just forget it.

 

[Guest]

You cannot be serious, Jacobo.

I was trying to, but I realize I made a mess of myself in my last post, I cannot see what does my brother have to do with all of this. Maybe he is just a lucky bast*rd (actually, that could be literally the reason he doesn't lose hair at all :lol: )

I ll try to do the right question now: You think that other androgens shouldn't have noticeable visual impact on hairloss, due to that weak binding affinity. Is not possible that Testosterone is enough to make hair fall without DHT at all? Do you think that there is not point at all on using spironolactone if you are taking internals? (Read those last 43 words again in my last previous sentence )

I just couldn't resist...But there is not a bit of irony on the rest of my post

Last 43 words what?

yes i don't think they have a noticeable effect due to the weak binding affinity, correct.

i don't think that testosterone not converted to dht will really do much damage on the hair, if any. maybe it will do 5% as much damage., if ti does any.

i don't really see a point of using topical spironolactone if finasteride or dutasteride is being used orally, but thats just my opinion.

 

[Jacobo]

Sorry, I didn't know that you were going to answer that post that quick, I edited it

 

[Guest]

Seriously, Michael Barry and Bryan are spironolactone believers (to certain extent), but if they believe it does some work against hairloss, it won't be because it competes with DHT (too weak AFAIK), then it has to work competing against T and other androgens. Is that a prove that without spironolactone then, the other androgens were making hair fall of?

I am still deciding if carrying on using spironolactone at night, or just forget it.

You're correct. I don't think spironolactone has any effect on DHT. I think it prevents test and othe androgens from attachigng to the androgen receptors. But that's not proof that without spironolactone, the other androgens were making hair fall out. Not at all.

finasteride only blocks ~85% of DHT. dutasteride blocks ~98.5%. There is still some DHT around to do damage to the follicles. I don't think that someone taking 2.5 mg of dutasteride a day would ever lose another hair to male pattern baldness. But that might not be safe. I think someone taking 0.5 mg a day and taking care of 98.5% would have their baldness, if it progresses, take about 20-30 times as long as it would have without the drug. So if it would have taken you 5 years to progress from Norwood 2 to Norwood 3 without drugs, it might take you 30 years on dutasteride.

p.s.- michael barry specificallly, also emphasizes the importance of using nizoral shampoo every other day or every 3 days in order to get its anti androgenic benefits. I think that this is much more useful than spironolactone.

 

[powersam]

oral spironolactone lowers both serum T and DHT.

and topical spironolactone will be far more effective in keeping your hair than nizoral will ever be.

 

[Guest]

oral spironolactone lowers both serum T and DHT.

and topical spironolactone will be far more effective in keeping your hair than nizoral will ever be.

we were not talking about oral spironolactone samuel.

and if dutasteride is knocking out 98.5%, what exactly is oral spironolactone going to do? lower the 1.5% to 1%? oh goody.

and nizoral has more convincing studies backing it than topical spironolactone. some topical spironolactone studies have not been very convincing.

 

[powersam]

go ask bryan, foote, michael barry, et all which they think is the stronger more potent hair loss treatment. topical spironolactone or nizoral. see what they say.

 

[Guest]

go ask bryan, foote, michael barry, et all which they think is the stronger more potent hair loss treatment. topical spironolactone or nizoral. see what they say.

they may very well say spironolactone.

but is spironolactone as convenient to apply? it can quite messy especially if you're a diffuser.

nizoral can just be subbed in as a shampoo.

 

[powersam]

go ask bryan, foote, michael barry, et all which they think is the stronger more potent hair loss treatment. topical spironolactone or nizoral. see what they say.

they may very well say spironolactone.

but is spironolactone as convenient to apply? it can quite messy especially if you're a diffuser.

nizoral can just be subbed in as a shampoo.

saying the above is very different to:

I think that this is much more useful than spironolactone.

it implies that nizoral will do more for your hair than topical spironolactone.

 

[Guest]

go ask bryan, foote, michael barry, et all which they think is the stronger more potent hair loss treatment. topical spironolactone or nizoral. see what they say.

they may very well say spironolactone.

but is spironolactone as convenient to apply? it can quite messy especially if you're a diffuser.

nizoral can just be subbed in as a shampoo.

saying the above is very different to:

I think that this is much more useful than spironolactone.

it implies that nizoral will do more for your hair than topical spironolactone.

no it doesnt actually. if i had said nizoral is more effective, then maybe you'd have a point. but i used the word useful. and that's subjective. for some people, having a regimen the size of what CCS's used to be could be useful. not for me.

 

[Jacobo]

I remember Michael Barry saying that Ketocanozole from Nizoral remains at therapeutic concentration for 72 hours. And Docj077 posted somewhere that Ketocanozole internal was a really strong antiandrogen. Why cannot be strong when topical?

Also, Powersam, think that Nizoral in some study (or more than one) performed as well as 2% minoxidil in 6 months trial (which is even more regrowth than propecia in 6 months). The author of the study assumes that probably is due to antiandrogen effect. If that is true, we have here one topical antiandrogen to use in a shampoo every 3 days that is more effective than Finasteride. Of course there is much research on Finas than Nizoral. But I cannot see why you are so sure than spironolactone is more effective than Nizoral.

 

[AussieExperiment]

Nizoral

If nizoral adds so much benefit to the regime than why only use it 3 times per week? Why not use nizoral 4 or 5 times per week in conjunction with a good conditioner such as Tricomin?

 

[oni]

I remember Michael Barry saying that Ketocanozole from Nizoral remains at therapeutic concentration for 72 hours.

AussieExperiment maybe because the above quote is true?

 

[powersam]

I remember Michael Barry saying that Ketocanozole from Nizoral remains at therapeutic concentration for 72 hours.

AussieExperiment maybe because the above quote is true?

woudnt mind seeing where he got that number though. cant find anything about it myself.

 

[AussieExperiment]

72 hours

Jacobo do you remember where Michael Barry got 72 hours from?

 

[Jacobo]

From this thread I guess

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/discussions ... toconazole

Third post.

Even more, it says 7 days at therapeutic concentration. 72 hours later was still detected in substantial amount in the actual hair. The reference comes from Nizoral website, I haven't read the article myself - and I won't bother.

I just googled the name of the authors, and they work for the University of Liege in Belgium, which is a respected Uni in Europe, and you will find other articles of them related with Keto and cited in other medical publications.

And the common sense here. Nizoral instructions recommends -for dandruff- to use (after the initial treatment) the shampoo 1 a week. Nizoral makers are even more interested than us to have success with their product. If it was necessary to use it more than that, they will say it, selling more then. I found that rather honest, they could recommend people to use it EOD forever, and more money for them!

If Nizoral works for dandruff once a week is because Keto works for that long. Why is not going to work for that long against hairloss?

I have to wash my hair with something, Nizoral is cheapish and my scalp copes with it , that is why I use it MWF. But FWIW, is not point in using it more than that. You can use other shampoos (nano or cosmetic ones or cheap ones) the rest of the week. Every time I think that Nizoral for convenience and price and effectiveness should be in anyones regimen. My twopence here.