Keratene Alphaactive Retard RESULTS

[Ibrium]

Another thing that bothers me is that neither ryan555 nor JulioGP appear to have had extremely high DHT levels in the first place. Correct me if I'm wrong on that - I may be misreading something there due to all the different scales of measurement that get used, it's kind of confusing me. My DHT levels were well above the normal male range before finasteride. So were the subjects in the tests that Keratene claim to have done, from what I've gathered. I'm more interested in the effect Keratene has on people in that situation.

I'm also looking into the studies on fin and dut, and finding that quite a lot of them mention Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry as the method used for measuring DHT. Haven't found one that says otherwise yet, though some of the ones I looked at didn't seem to provide specific information. I can access full text for most things on Google Scholar, so let me know if there's one you want to check.

[Ibrium]

Slight correction - not all of them use LC-MS, but generally the methods seem to be similar to that, e.g. a different form of chromatography but otherwise a pretty similar approach.

In any case, while I have a problem with some parts of the response from Keratene, their argument about DHT testing methods can't just be ignored.

[Julian P]

I agree with Ibrium. I'm certainly no expert, but scanning independent literature, the Kératene guys seem to have a valid point. F.e. this one http://dev.urotoday.com/images/stori..._2_176_182.pdf also suggests that the IA methods are not reliable.

For dutch speaking people the introduction of this masters' dissertation is quite good to get a basic understanding of the methods: http://lib.ugent.be/fulltxt/RUG01/00...12_0001_AC.pdf. It also claims the same: IA methods (ELISA and RIA) are not very reliable to test DHT levels since they're not very good at distinguishing it from similar structures steroďds.

[JulioGP]

Another thing that bothers me is that neither ryan555 nor JulioGP appear to have had extremely high DHT levels in the first place. Correct me if I'm wrong on that - I may be misreading something there due to all the different scales of measurement that get used, it's kind of confusing me. My DHT levels were well above the normal male range before finasteride. So were the subjects in the tests that Keratene claim to have done, from what I've gathered. I'm more interested in the effect Keratene has on people in that situation.

I'm also looking into the studies on fin and dut, and finding that quite a lot of them mention Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry as the method used for measuring DHT. Haven't found one that says otherwise yet, though some of the ones I looked at didn't seem to provide specific information. I can access full text for most things on Google Scholar, so let me know if there's one you want to check.

Hello Ibrium,

Let me make a correction. About my DHT levels, no, they are not too high.

Note that this scale has been done to study the Kératene, the scale is exactly the same used in my blood test, ie, pg / ml.

Look:


Note also that the DHT candidates tested was all above 1,000 pg / ml(1,2 and 3 of yellow column) and many above 2,000 pg / ml(1,2 and 3 of yellow column), well above my level of DHT which is around 900 pg / ml.

Only one candidate who took placebo had DHT below 900 pg / ml (subject 29), so this can eliminate candidate comparison. No other had the DHT in a low range like mine, all much higher.

Look reducing DHT announced in yellow column number 4. More than 70% in most cases.!!

Here my results:


Ie in my case the DHT level was not that high and if the Kératene is to work as proposed, there would be a sharp reduction in my DHT.

Even though my DHT was somewhere around 1,500 pg / ml (which was not), there should have been a decrease of DHT in any%, after all, even though there was a large reduction in DHT should be ANY reduction somewhere%, which does not occur.

Even Ryan555 tests that were conducted with another method and another scale (this method is also quite common), there was no reduction in DHT.

Anyway, the method performed on my exam (pg / ml) illustrates a comparison with this scale of reduction announced by Kératene, which did not happen.

Another thing, it is common for those with baldness have much higher levels than my DHT, so you can fix it on the table that were allegedly tested several individuals.

My DHT is relatively low compared with those subjects tested by the company Kératene. Taking this into consideration, I was a candidate for easy change in the level of DHT, if the product worked.

[25 going on 65]

I agree with Ibrium. I'm certainly no expert, but scanning independent literature, the Kératene guys seem to have a valid point. F.e. this one http://dev.urotoday.com/images/stori..._2_176_182.pdf also suggests that the IA methods are not reliable.

For dutch speaking people the introduction of this masters' dissertation is quite good to get a basic understanding of the methods: http://lib.ugent.be/fulltxt/RUG01/00...12_0001_AC.pdf. It also claims the same: IA methods (ELISA and RIA) are not very reliable to test DHT levels since they're not very good at distinguishing it from similar structures steroďds.

They might be less accurate, but they seem to be accurate to a reasonable degree because every fin or dut user I have seen post results on this forum shows exactly what you would expect from a fin or dut user....DHT levels below the standard range
Same happened to me when I got mine tested. Yet the inaccuracy of these testing methods show themselves suddenly when users try to test this product?

I am no scientist but the numbers are not making sense so far

[ryan555]

Here's a study comparing LC-MS, GC-MS, and RIA for measuring male hormones. It makes my argument, that while LC-MS is more sensitive, results derived from RIA were highly correlated to the LC-MS results. In other words, when a sample was high, it was reported as high using all methods, and vice versa. RIA gives an accurate picture of hormone levels (especially relative to other samples), even while sometimes overstating total levels. If Julio and I had our first sample evaluated using LC-MS and our second sample using RIA or ELISA, then Keratene would have a very valid point. But the fact that our tests showed very static before and after levels of DHT illustrate that the test is effective enough to show that no drop in DHT occurred. Were this test as worthless as they claim, we would see DHT levels reported all over the place. In three tests i have taken post-finasteride, my levels were reported at 52, 50, and 55. Not exaclty random. And not to beat a dead horse, but these tests were more than effective enough to show not only my drop in DHT while taking finasteride, but the gradual increase back to normal as I came off the drug (I had multiple tests during that time period).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17507629

[ryan555]

They might be less accurate, but they seem to be accurate to a reasonable degree because every fin or dut user I have seen post results on this forum shows exactly what you would expect from a fin or dut user....DHT levels below the standard range
Same happened to me when I got mine tested. Yet the inaccuracy of these testing methods show themselves suddenly when users try to test this product?

I am no scientist but the numbers are not making sense so far

This is my point. Also, they claim DRAMATIC drops in DHT, not subtle ones. If this was a matter of 10 or 20%, then I might not trust other test methodologies to pick up the change. But at 70% reduction, this would become apparent.

[ryan555]

Hello Ibrium,

Let me make a correction. About my DHT levels, no, they are not too high.

Note that this scale has been done to study the Kératene, the scale is exactly the same used in my blood test, ie, pg / ml.

Look:


Note also that the DHT candidates tested was all above 1,000 pg / ml(1,2 and 3 of yellow column) and many above 2,000 pg / ml(1,2 and 3 of yellow column), well above my level of DHT which is around 900 pg / ml.

Only one candidate who took placebo had DHT below 900 pg / ml (subject 29), so this can eliminate candidate comparison. No other had the DHT in a low range like mine, all much higher.

Look reducing DHT announced in yellow column number 4. More than 70% in most cases.!!

Here my results:


Ie in my case the DHT level was not that high and if the Kératene is to work as proposed, there would be a sharp reduction in my DHT.

Even though my DHT was somewhere around 1,500 pg / ml (which was not), there should have been a decrease of DHT in any%, after all, even though there was a large reduction in DHT should be ANY reduction somewhere%, which does not occur.

Even Ryan555 tests that were conducted with another method and another scale (this method is also quite common), there was no reduction in DHT.

Anyway, the method performed on my exam (pg / ml) illustrates a comparison with this scale of reduction announced by Kératene, which did not happen.

Another thing, it is common for those with baldness have much higher levels than my DHT, so you can fix it on the table that were allegedly tested several individuals.

My DHT is relatively low compared with those subjects tested by the company Kératene. Taking this into consideration, I was a candidate for easy change in the level of DHT, if the product worked.

This prompts another question for them to answer if they ever respond:

How is it that every test subject was such an outlier with regard to DHT levels? Did you pre-screen every candidate and only take those who had extremely high DHT? Otherwise, this would seem extraordinarily unlikely that all your test subjects just happened to have levels way beyond the typical reference points.

[youngin]

Here my results:


Ie in my case the DHT level was not that high and if the Kératene is to work as proposed, there would be a sharp reduction in my DHT.

Something is shady about this. Your DHT levels went UP on both Saw Palmetto AND Keratene Retard. What time of day was your base line taken? Your results are messed up.

[Ibrium]

My DHT is relatively low compared with those subjects tested by the company Kératene. Taking this into consideration, I was a candidate for easy change in the level of DHT, if the product worked.

My point was that maybe Keratene is not as effective in people who don't have really high DHT. That is, fin can take you from high to low or medium to low, but Keratene may only really work well going from high to medium.

That said, without verifying the accuracy of the test itself, we don't know for sure that your DHT is unaffected.

They might be less accurate, but they seem to be accurate to a reasonable degree because every fin or dut user I have seen post results on this forum shows exactly what you would expect from a fin or dut user....DHT levels below the standard range
Same happened to me when I got mine tested. Yet the inaccuracy of these testing methods show themselves suddenly when users try to test this product?

I am no scientist but the numbers are not making sense so far

To be honest, I think the people saying this may be overstating how many people on fin actually get their DHT levels tested. I already mentioned myself as a counterexample - I've had a ridiculously wide range of DHT test results over the duration of my time on fin.

Of course, the simple fact that fin probably works better than Keratene, even if Keratene works, would make the specificity issues less likely to be a problem. The margin of error is too wide for Keratene, but not as likely to be too wide for fin. What we want is a test without a large margin of error.

In any case, we have extremely small samples here, and people getting their tests done through all different sources of unknown reliability. Statistically, we can't rule out the fact that some of the changes in results could have occurred by chance, assuming an imprecise method was being used.

Something is shady about this. Your DHT levels went UP on both Saw Palmetto AND Keratene Retard. What time of day was your base line taken? Your results are messed up.

This is kind of my point. There are major natural fluctuations in DHT for a single individual anyway. The test, assuming it was even done correctly, is not a very precise one in terms of determining the actual level of DHT. (Again, I've had my DHT seemingly go up while on fin. It was probably for one or both of these reasons.) There are too many factors here. And there are also individual things he may have done that had some other impact on DHT or the effectiveness of Keratene.

[JulioGP]

Friends Ibrium and youngin,

I see you did not follow all the posts in another topic about Kératene, I'll answer both questions, but had already answered this earlier.

According to one theory of Saw palmetto is that with their use there is a reduction in the levels of DHT in the follicle and not in the blood. Thinking this way, it is entirely feasible to use the saw palmetto, there is an increase in DHT blood because there is more left in the DHT system as DHT in the follicles would be smaller. If there is less DHT in the follicles, automatically "be left" more DHT in the blood, simple.

Ibrium, everyone here has an opinion and I respect that, but to me it makes no sense when you say Kératene only have effect in people with high DHT. This is because in the actual instruction manual of Kératene there is a dosage for various levels of DHT, including levels below 750pg/ml, so this theory that Kératene only work in individuals with high DHT is not correct .

I wish many others come here to show their results, because all claims that I'm reading so far has no technical arguments sufficient to prove that the product could present some results different from 2 shown here. I believed so much in everything I read about the product, to find my result and a few weeks later Ryan. That made me a revolt to have spent more than 60 Euros with a product that does not work, and have lost almost one month in this product.

I wish everyone here who have any questions about my result, which buy Kératene and do the blood test, this is the only way to know if you're wasting your time and money on a product that is not saving the hair.

[youngin]

According to one theory of Saw palmetto is that with their use there is a reduction in the levels of DHT in the follicle and not in the blood. Thinking this way, it is entirely feasible to use the saw palmetto, there is an increase in DHT blood because there is more left in the DHT system as DHT in the follicles would be smaller. If there is less DHT in the follicles, automatically "be left" more DHT in the blood, simple.

I have read several studies about Saw Palmetto and never seen this theory by any scientist. This theory is entirely wrong anyway. If you restrict 5aR at the follicle you would have more free Testosterone not more DHT. It makes ZERO sense.

[Jcm800]

It'd be appreciated if the keretene rep would step up and answer the mounting questions, there's a back log building up..

[JulioGP]

I have read several studies about Saw Palmetto and never seen this theory by any scientist. This theory is entirely wrong anyway. If you restrict 5aR at the follicle you would have more free Testosterone not more DHT. It makes ZERO sense.

Yes, this is one of the theories of Saw Palmetto. And if this theory is not correct, I can say that saw palmetto does not work for nothing, because in two months I took 320mg of Saw Palmetto and did 2 blood tests to test its efficiency, my DHT had a considerable increase. See it at my exams.

If you allow the 5AR develop more testosterone into DHT, but prevents binding to these follicles, yes, you would have more DHT in the blood (by having less DHT in the follicles) and automatically your testosterone will decrease, which was proved in my 2 months of tests with Saw Palmetto. Note that the second I had my results testosterone falls followed from the time at which the DHT increased.

If you have more DHT, which will automatically have less testosterone because changes are dynamic. At least that testosterone is being transformed into another thing (hormones), and this is what can cause side effects.

[ryan555]

Guys, think whatever you want. If you want to continue to buy products from a company run by nitwits making ridiculous unsubstantiated claims and basing their product's efficacy on a criticism of testing methods and therefore the physicians that prescribe them, then so be it. There are so many huxters in this industry and I guess it's understandable that we will often be moved to believe anything out of desperation. I've been on this board for a long time and I've seen lots of frustrated guys wasting money and more importantly time and hair on these products, yet we continue to take the bait. TRX2, Folexen, Keratene...the list grows and will continue to grow as long as we are willing to give them our money, fail to test whether the product actually works, and even defend them after they're proven to be bogus.

Julio and I do at least have some science to back up our opinions of this product and we did spend the time and money to shed a little bit of light on the claims of this company. The side you're arguing is based upon some very unprofessional company rep basically calling us liars, and they seem as though they will not be responding to the numerous valid questions that have been raised. At the very least, they are spending a great deal of time calculating their response because they clearly have no easy or quick retort to the criticism. Hell, I've even offered to retake the test using their protocol to clear this up once and for all and they haven't even responded to that. If it were my company and I believed in the product, I would pay for the tests myself to clear up the doubt.

Until they PROVE otherwise, I am sticking with my opinion that this product is a total scam. Cling on if you want. All you have to lose is your money and your hair.