You still have not answered my question, and stop changing the subject. Since you know so much about "DHT and how the body works", why do most people not suffer these sides from high levels of DHT suppression?
Enlighten me.
There are so many grey areas in your argument it's hilarious. What are you basing your facts off of? Biased studies? Men on these forums? Yourself? Many men have had sides from the drug and I am sure there are a plethora of unreported cases. There are LAWSUITS against the drug because of the damage it's caused men! Stop being an ignorant fool and understand that this drug is not SAFE for everyone! Christ.... Do you honestly think every man is going to report negative side effects? I am not saying Fin doesn't do it's job but it is stone age in comparison to what's going to be coming out in the future.
There are so many grey areas in your argument it's hilarious. What are you basing your facts off of? Biased studies? Men on these forums? Yourself? Many men have had sides from the drug and I am sure there are a plethora of unreported cases. There are LAWSUITS against the drug because of the damage it's caused men! Stop being an ignorant fool and understand that this drug is not SAFE for everyone! Christ.... Do you honestly think every man is going to report negative side effects? I am not saying Fin doesn't do it's job but it is stone age in comparison to what's going to be coming out in the future.
Still didn't answer my question. If DHT is so crucial for all these things.
Why don't the vast majority of people suffer these sides? So are you suggesting that in a double blinded study wiht 5% incidence of sides, 95% of people are choosing not to report them? If so, on what basis?
Problem is your argument totally starts to fall apart when you actually you know, think about it. So you keep changing the topic.
Also what is going to come out in the future? Lauster? Oh wait. Even future treatments will work best in conjuction with finasteride.
I don't buy those studies at all that say that finasteride has only 5% side effects. There are just too many examples to the contrary, myself included. I don't believe that our bodies simply produce DHT for no reason at all, and that major suppression of it will cause no side effects whatsoever.
Also, treatments like those of Replicel, Lauster, and Tsuji will not need to be aided with finasteride at all. These will be cellular treatments where the stem cells that are being multiplied will be taken from DHT-resistant cells anyway.
There are so many grey areas in your argument it's hilarious. What are you basing your facts off of? Biased studies? Men on these forums? Yourself? Many men have had sides from the drug and I am sure there are a plethora of unreported cases. There are LAWSUITS against the drug because of the damage it's caused men! Stop being an ignorant fool and understand that this drug is not SAFE for everyone! Christ.... Do you honestly think every man is going to report negative side effects? I am not saying Fin doesn't do it's job but it is stone age in comparison to what's going to be coming out in the future.
So peer reviewed studies are biased, but lawsuits are objective definitive proof? I can bring a lawsuit about anything for any reason.
This whole argument is stupid and useless. Finasteride does have side effects just like any other drug. The side effects are published and well documented. It is the only proven treatment that is currently available to slow, stop or possibly reverse hair loss. Every balding man should at least consider taking it. If you don't want to take it good for you, if you do want to take it good for you. Period end of story. Now please STFU!
Also, treatments like those of Replicel, Lauster, and Tsuji will not need to be aided with finasteride at all. These will be cellular treatments where the stem cells that are being multiplied will be taken from DHT-resistant cells anyway.
Only problem is that Replicel's treatment isn't really using all the stem cells in a hair follicle, they're only using Dermal Sheath Cup cells, so its not really known yet if that alone will create new follicles from scratch. Its more likely that these cells may bind to existing miniaturized or dormant follicles and rejuvenate them.
Tsuji's and Lauster's methods are the holy grail with Tsuji's method being superior only by the fact that it would enable simple cell injections and watching yourself grow a lion's mane of hair. Lauster's (for now anyway) would require implants of the artificial follicles which would be quite lengthy to do for full thickness (15,000+ follicles). However, I suppose since he's basically cloned them, perhaps he's got control over how many hairs grow out of a single follicle? Maybe you could have a choice of implanting only 3 and 4 hair grafts and lessen the amount of work, and then limit yourself to 1-3 hair grafts for the hairline for a natural look?
Whatever the case is, their treatments are long overdue and Finasteride's death is also long overdue.
So peer reviewed studies are biased, but lawsuits are objective definitive proof? I can bring a lawsuit about anything for any reason.
This whole argument is stupid and useless. Finasteride does have side effects just like any other drug. The side effects are published and well documented. It is the only proven treatment that is currently available to slow, stop or possibly reverse hair loss. Every balding man should at least consider taking it. If you don't want to take it good for you, if you do want to take it good for you. Period end of story. Now please STFU!
Comment