Neogenic by L’Oréal

[elusive52]

Is that all you have? You're going to refer me to page 82 of this thread and tell me these 2 - 3 hairs are proof of a hair loss cure?

Where are the actual macrophotographic assessments? What is the hair count? lol 3 hairs? LOL - so after 3 months a NW5 earns himself 3 hairs? A bit different to the quoted 1700 they initially stated right? - I mean, im trying to understand what type of brain would be stupid enough not to ****ing see this?

You say that a company as large as Loreal would not fabricate results - oh what a bumbling moronic fool you truly are, corporations have proven over the past few years to be the biggest liars in industry - only the retarded sheep-like dross general public which constitutes mostly people like you continuously fall for their bullshit, from banks to hair loss it's all about money you ****ing idiot.

Let me take you back to 2003, if you believe corporations are incapable of lying then how do you explain this:

http://www.divineskin.com/spectraldnc/aminexil.asp

Study those graphs, because according to Loreal (Vichy), the supreme corporation, Aminexil was the ****ing holy grail.

There's no need for you to laugh at my posts, we all know who's going to be the joke by December when Neogenic fades into the darkness with the rest of the bullshit products released by your almighty "Vichy" corporation.

P.S. if Loreal truly had the cure to hair loss you'd think they'd plaster it over the world and release it under LOREAL, I mean think about it, if YOU found the cure to hair loss wouldnt you want your name out there? LOL.

you obviously have some very serious issues, so i think its best to leave you to stew in your bitterness and anger and leave it there.

cheers.

[Conpecia]

I'm with UK here. Just look at the marketing alone. If this was a potential cure or even a somewhat effective treatment it would be sold by L'Oreal proper and not Vichy, there would be detailed photographic evidence, and FAR more fanfare. It would be all over the Internet. Google Histogen, a treatment we may not see for 5 more years, then google Neogenic, a treatment that is actually out. Seems like Histogen is more popular; the only people talking about Neogenic are the hairloss forums like us. That makes no sense if a cosmetic giant like L'Oreal has actually manufactured a decent treatment for mpb. And like UK, I'm also having a hard time understanding why there's this "Well, they haven't given us any reason to believe it will work, but nevertheless, it COULD work, so let's all buy it" mentality. Are you guys awake? Anybody looking at anything else on this forum? A ton of people just got ripped off buying fake equol from Folexen, a ton of people bought into Replicel's exaggerations back in March, invested, and lost money. For the love of God, this SAME COMPANY released a product claiming the SAME THING and it ended up totally bombing. I just don't get it. The skepticism is far too low. I'll be glad to be proven wrong and I will even buy the stuff myself if it works, but Jesus no way do I think it will, and no way in hell would I defend it at this point.

[clandestine]

Basically, fuᴄk Neogenic and fuᴄk L'Oreal until they can show us results i.e. macrophotography. I'm with UK_ and Conpecia on this one.

[Erick]

I ordered Neogenic and should get it either today or monday. I was thinking about also buying Trx2 but I will hold that for a while, so if I do get results it will due to Neogenic since fin has been basically done all it can.

[thechamp]

Gutted

So gutted any sign of hair loss stopping?

[gutted]

So gutted any sign of hair loss stopping?

my hair loss stopped quite some time ago champ i dont attribute it to neogenic.

[Pate]

[B]"Scientific papers" were also released for the product Aminexil, it means nothing.

Well no, it means something. It means there is a valid scientific mechanism behind the product that probably does have some (minor) effect on stimulating hair growth. Aminexil did too.

It just doesn't mean that mechanism is going to have the power to do anything more than than piss in the wind against the mechanism that causes MPB. Because the MPB mechanism is extremely powerful.

I don't think Neogenic will prove any more successful than minox and it'll probably prove less so. All these treatments - minox, aminexil, stemoxydine, capsaicin, vitamin E, procyanidins... they probably do have some minor effect, and that's the reason they are showing positive results in vitro. As in, they have a positive effect on the growth of hair cells in a test tube.

The problem is when you progress from in vitro to a man with MPB, this small effect on hair cells is totally swamped by the mechanism of MPB, which just destroys everything in its path.

[Pate]

Think the picture he was referring to was posted in this thread, try page 82.

Thanks Dazza. There's so much crap posted on these forums sometimes it's hard to see everything!

I'm undecided about the pic. Simply having a couple of new hairs doesn't mean anything because natural variation means hair count in a small area will wax and wane. But a couple of those other hairs look thicker and darker as well.

To be honest even if these results are genuine they are not ground-breaking and I'm not going to spend basically $100/month on it to get a few extra hairs. I will not be trying this product.

Also interesting how in the post below that there was the "forum infiltration" plan. I guess we need to keep an eye out for this, because they will come to BTT for sure.

[LPSboxing]

Well no, it means something. It means there is a valid scientific mechanism behind the product that probably does have some (minor) effect on stimulating hair growth. Aminexil did too.

It just doesn't mean that mechanism is going to have the power to do anything more than than piss in the wind against the mechanism that causes MPB. Because the MPB mechanism is extremely powerful.

I don't think Neogenic will prove any more successful than minox and it'll probably prove less so. All these treatments - minox, aminexil, stemoxydine, capsaicin, vitamin E, procyanidins... they probably do have some minor effect, and that's the reason they are showing positive results in vitro. As in, they have a positive effect on the growth of hair cells in a test tube.

The problem is when you progress from in vitro to a man with MPB, this small effect on hair cells is totally swamped by the mechanism of MPB, which just destroys everything in its path.

hey wait a second, this post actually makes sense! heresy!

it's hard to find posts that make sense on a balding forums nowadays

[UK_]

Well no, it means something. It means there is a valid scientific mechanism behind the product that probably does have some (minor) effect on stimulating hair growth. Aminexil did too.

It just doesn't mean that mechanism is going to have the power to do anything more than than piss in the wind against the mechanism that causes MPB. Because the MPB mechanism is extremely powerful.

I don't think Neogenic will prove any more successful than minox and it'll probably prove less so. All these treatments - minox, aminexil, stemoxydine, capsaicin, vitamin E, procyanidins... they probably do have some minor effect, and that's the reason they are showing positive results in vitro. As in, they have a positive effect on the growth of hair cells in a test tube.

The problem is when you progress from in vitro to a man with MPB, this small effect on hair cells is totally swamped by the mechanism of MPB, which just destroys everything in its path.

What about the rest of my quote? I stated that "no topical lotion is going to treat hair loss to the standards most Norwoods beyond NW2 require", I appreciate there may be "science" behind a product, hell, there's science behind a large quantity of drugs/treatments that have shown anecdotal evidence of hair growth stemming way back to the 1970's, but it means nothing.

What scientific papers were released? I havent been able to have a read of these - and people on other forums are laughing at everyone here for giving Neogenic so much attention - I usually dont respond to these quasi-scientific hyper-commercial releases because for the past 20 years every last one of them (accompanied with copious "scientific papers") has been an utter failure, this will be no different.

People call me bitter - but IMO belief is always a fools game.

[Sogeking]

What about the rest of my quote? I stated that "no topical lotion is going to treat hair loss to the standards most Norwoods beyond NW2 require", I appreciate there may be "science" behind a product, hell, there's science behind a large quantity of drugs/treatments that have shown anecdotal evidence of hair growth stemming way back to the 1970's, but it means nothing.

What scientific papers were released? I havent been able to have a read of these - and people on other forums are laughing at everyone here for giving Neogenic so much attention - I usually dont respond to these quasi-scientific hyper-commercial releases because for the past 20 years every last one of them (accompanied with copious "scientific papers") has been an utter failure, this will be no different.

People call me bitter - but IMO belief is always a fools game.

@bold part
Well it is basically what Pate said. He stated that in best case scenario if the science behind it is real it will have some minor effect. Minor effect means it won't put a dent to the missing are of hair on NW 1 let alone on NW 2. At best this might slow down the process due to the less blood supply meaning less DHT attacking the hair follicels but in a way the same can be said about Nizoral. And despite of it all I haven't heard anything about Nizoral growing some hair. Howeve I do think it can to a minor extent slow it down.

So paying 100$ dollars for a product that MIGHT slow down hairloss is simply not enough for me.

In short I concurr with both you and Pate. Just wanted to clarify Pates opinion hope I was right.

[Pate]

What about the rest of my quote? I stated that "no topical lotion is going to treat hair loss to the standards most Norwoods beyond NW2 require",

If you want an argument you're going to have to choose another subject.

I agree, for the reasons I said in my post - as Sogeking pointed out. The only topical lotion that would stand a chance is one that targets the actual mechanism of MPB, not one that just enhances hair growth. We're still many years away from that, although the progress made in the last couple of years on the PGD2 front is pretty impressive IMO.

What scientific papers were released? I havent been able to have a read of these - and people on other forums are laughing at everyone here for giving Neogenic so much attention

To be honest I don't remember, because I wasn't terribly interested. I don't even remember whether they were peer-reviewed journal papers or just research papers. I've never thought Neogenic will grow much hair, especially on men. I just remember coming across some research from these guys on the stemoxydine mechanism.

I'd give it a try, maybe, if it was the price of generic minox. But for nearly $100/month to grow 4% density, no way. I need 200% density increase, not 4%.

[Erick]

I had my package arrive yesterday, there's only one problem the damn mail doesn't deliver to your house. You have to go to the damn post office to pick it up. If I knew that was the case I probably wouldn't have ordered it.

[the_dude78]

I had my package arrive yesterday, there's only one problem the damn mail doesn't deliver to your house. You have to go to the damn post office to pick it up. If I knew that was the case I probably wouldn't have ordered it.

wtf?!

Do they have a giant t-rex guarding the entrance to the post office??

[Erick]

wtf?!

Do they have a giant t-rex guarding the entrance to the post office??

No, they have ghosts