Setipiprant

[TubZy]

I don't say that minoxidil causes cancer? Where do you see that. Open up your eyes.

Your response was hilarious dude to say the least. Comparing PGE2 with icecream. Or saying that something like IGF-1 can only make "cancer grow". People with laron syndrome are the proof that you are talking total nonsense. Who are you to argue with literature and studies anyway? You copy things which are nonsense and where you have no clue about.

Yes there is a risk in "everything". It's relative. We might aswell argue that crossing the street is dangerous or breathing in air is dangerous. What's your point?

Again you are responsible for your own health, do whatever you want.

I'll repeat again. My initial response was more to project a picture that the guy you mention has no clue what he is doing and on which pathways he is acting. He uses that much stuff/methods (probably sitting in the mirror all day) that he might be acting on other pathways that help him (somewhat).

However anyone that says that he knows what the cure is, is laughable. Even more laughable if he is going to correlate it with pathways or "progenitors" while he has no clue what he is doing. In science we work through the scientific method;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method.

Make yourself familiar with it so you don't post such a ridiculous response next time.

All I know is that Kanes RU gave me sides and setipiprant has stopped my shedding and itch completely with zero sides. At least Swiss is doing this all for free and it openly working with the hair loss community with his blog. He is not selling anything and answers questions on his ask.fm

I'm not sure why you still get involved in the hair loss forums so much? You had a transplant and are on RU for maintenance. Go enjoy life bro instead of researching all these theories all day. You are the only person that is really trying hard to bring Swiss' protocol down when people have been having results with it. Why do you care so much? He put in hard work to help at least provide a viable solution. It is still early but I have never seen someone so against it for no reason esepcislly when he is not even selling anything. Unless you are still getting paid from Kane to sell his RU....you are not fooling anyone man

[Swooping]

Yeah, well, at least he's doing something. I may not believe his method is a viable option for most of us, but at least he's doing something and not just waiting to be screwd over by society's complete indifference to this disease. Sure beats spreading negativity and trying to convince everyone a cure or effective treatment isn't coming within the next five centuries.
You know, even if he did end up messing up his health, I'd still commend him for the balls and dedication. I am so done with this baldie passivity.

Sure he has balls and dedication. I applaud him for that. He just doesn't always know what he is talking about at all. His previous message reflected that immensely.

Being negative or positive doesn't matter anyway. It won't influence how fast a cure will arrive in the future right? One can be objective, realistic and rely on science about particular things though.

Time will tell eventually when we will get a cure. Could be over 10 years, could be over 20 years. Yes we are passive, but itīs easy to point fingers. What would your plan be? Surely if we would unite we could achieve great things or at least put effort into stuff to get something done. That is the only way, there is no other way.

[InBeforeTheCure]

Can someone help me understand the graph on page 7 of this Setipiprant document from Kythera? It shows full PGD2 inhibition at 100nM.

The molar mass of Seti is apparently 402.138 g/mol. 100e-9 mols per liter would be 4.02e-5 g/L, which is extremely dilute.

That can't be right. What am I doing wrong?

[JSmith120]

@Swooping

Thank you for correcting to me. I learn more and more by reading your posts. You truly are amazing.
I understand where you are coming from. Both you and TubZy bring up excellent points.

If you did not know, California warns people that the water they are drinking contains carcinogens.

It seems like everything contains carcinogens. You are right, we should be looking more closely into PGE2 and its functions. Thank you for taking the time to respond to me. Btw, I saw your transplant. Looks good man. Wonder why you are even on here? Shoot, once I cure my hairloss, I'm outta here! But i'm pretty sure you are just here to help, right?

[Swooping]

All I know is that Kanes RU gave me sides and setipiprant has stopped my shedding and itch completely with zero sides. At least Swiss is doing this all for free and it openly working with the hair loss community with his blog. He is not selling anything and answers questions on his ask.fm

I'm not sure why you still get involved in the hair loss forums so much? You had a transplant and are on RU for maintenance. Go enjoy life bro instead of researching all these theories all day. You are the only person that is really trying hard to bring Swiss' protocol down when people have been having results with it. Why do you care so much? He put in hard work to help at least provide a viable solution. It is still early but I have never seen someone so against it for no reason esepcislly when he is not even selling anything. Unless you are still getting paid from Kane to sell his RU....you are not fooling anyone man

I try to put him down? Nah, not at all. Don't bring up that discussion even. He is a evil person, permabanned from every forum. Has blackmailed a transgender (what a hero), released private information about people, is a neo-nazi etc. So dude please, don't start that way. Everyone is aware of this. In fact he is the reason that PM functions on forums are gone. You didn't know this? Now you do.

Where do you see I am against it? I'm just saying that primarily he talks bro science. Anyone who talks about a "cure" from behind his keyboard by slamming chemicals on his head, burning and wounding his head is a joke. Even more funny is how he pretends to know the "cure" by acting on "progenitors" etc. How hard is this to understand? Not even the best hair researchers in the world know what pathways act after AR activation. Anyone other who is pretending to know better is lying. Period.

I know Swiss argues that Kane has 12 soldiers who are marketing for him. Hilarious, truth being told the only one who is earning money with these groupbuys is Swiss itself seeing the outrageous prices of seti for example. It's way cheaper but you don't know this. That "private forum" handles with no transparency. Hence you don't even know where you get your stuff from. You don't even know where they test the products. Cause they are being sold to you with a huge mark-up dummy. You believe what you want to believe and what you is told. Just like with your previous message. You copied his message that I were wrong. I replied to you and showed how stupid that reply of him was. That explains everything from you pretty quickly how fast you tend to believe things that are being told to you.

About your question I study bio science and have a particular emphasis and interest in hair follicle biology. I'm here to help people. My hair loss is fixed now somewhat yes although I would love to drop RU for a better alternative in the future. But my interest for hair follicle biology won't fade away. I have had a shitload of questions lately too across the forums because of my hair transplant from people. So I'm quite busy and like to help people. I also enjoy scientific discussions. My posting history on websites tell all. Just go look at them.

Do whatever you want furthermore lol and stay on-topic.

[TubZy]

I try to put him down? Nah, not at all. Don't bring up that discussion even. He is a evil person, permabanned from every forum. Has blackmailed a transgender (what a hero), released private information about people, is a neo-nazi etc. So dude please, don't start that way. Everyone is aware of this. In fact he is the reason that PM functions on forums are gone. You didn't know this? Now you do.

Where do you see I am against it? I'm just saying that primarily he talks bro science. Anyone who talks about a "cure" from behind his keyboard by slamming chemicals on his head, burning and wounding his head is a joke. Even more funny is how he pretends to know the "cure" by acting on "progenitors" etc. How hard is this to understand? Not even the best hair researchers in the world know how to tackle the problem or what pathways act after AR activation. Anyone other who is pretending to know better is lying. Period.

I know Swiss argues that Kane has 12 soldiers who are marketing for him. Hilarious, truth being told the only one who is earning money with these groupbuys is Swiss itself seeing the outrageous prices of seti for example. It's way cheaper but you don't know this. That "private forum" handles with no transparency. Hence you don't even know where you get your stuff from. You don't even know where they test the products. Cause they are being sold to you with a huge mark-up dummy. You believe what you want to believe and what you is told. Just like with your previous message. You copied his message that I were wrong. I replied to you and showed how stupid that reply of him was. That explains everything from you pretty quickly how fast you tend to believe things that are being told to you.

About your question I study bio science and have a particular emphasis and interest in hair follicle biology. I'm here to help people. My hair loss is fixed now somewhat yes although I would love to drop RU for a better alternative in the future. But my interest for hair follicle biology won't fade away. I have had a shitload of questions lately too across the forums because of my hair transplant. So I'm quite busy and like to help people. I also enjoy scientific discussions. My post records on websites tell all. Just go look at them .

So how is this any different than putting Kane's RU on your head? You DON'T know what you are putting on your head either. So your statement about slamming chemicals on your head is invalid. He is following research from one of the world's top doctor Dr. Cotsarelis, so how is it all bro science? If anything, seti is more safe than RU.

I can honestly really care less if you think he is a neo-nazi or blackmailed a transgender. This is about hair loss not a drama scene.

Where do I see your against? lmao, you are on every forum saying PGD2 won't regrow hair when it's for maintenance. Then you are claiming PGE2 is is going to cause cancer, then switch to saying "well there is a risk to everything" after someone calls you out on it.

[Diffuse Danny]

sorry swooping me thinks you doth protest too much.... (a saying that's probably way before the time of most here)

[Swooping]

So how is this any different than putting Kane's RU on your head? You DON'T know what you are putting on your head either. So your statement about slamming chemicals on your head is invalid. He is following research from one of the world's top doctor Dr. Cotsarelis, so how is it all bro science? If anything, seti is more safe than RU.

I can honestly really care less if you think he is a neo-nazi or blackmailed a transgender. This is about hair loss not a drama scene.

Where do I see your against? lmao, you are on every forum saying PGD2 won't regrow hair when it's for maintenance. Then you are claiming PGE2 is is going to cause cancer, then switch to saying "well there is a risk to everything" after someone calls you out on it.

Wow damn man. What are you smoking? My whole argumentation on this topic is that setipiprant will never get regrowth by the primary intention of in-vivo observational evidence of other DP2 antagonists. Furthermore I didn't say that PGE2 is going to CAUSE cancer it's a carcinogen. That's a big, big difference. After all this discussion you still don't get it unbelievable. People who will read this topic will understand that. Studies back me up in this one, I quoted them. Even I hope that the clinical trials will come close to the effectiveness of finasteride, but that's far from sure at this point.

You make it sound as if PGE2 only works on PGE2. No, it works on allot of downstream pathways that you have no clue about, hence they could be for instance attributing to some pro-hair growth effect. This is the essence of molecular signalling. Just like the best hair loss researchers still don't know why minoxidil works. So in a recent review of A.M Christiano in 2013 she mentions 2 probable mechanisms of minoxidil action for the pro-hair growth effects but even she is unsure, just like every other elite researcher.

What has Kane to do with this all? He has a shop based on commercial incentive with the primary intention of earning money. Just like 100's of other research chemicals shops online. Why do you keep bringing him up? Who cares about him. It's funny that you talk about a "drama scene". Who is creating drama here dude, you are. I'm making argumentation in a discussion you don't even provide counter arguments to the content.

Yes it's Cotsarelis his research. But it's a hypothesis.. How many times do I need to tell you furthermore that the primary intention of my message wasn't to warn you for something. You are responsible for your own health. The primary intention of my message was and I repeat again that he does that many things on his scalp that you can't relate it to any pathway(s) because the compounds he uses have a BROAD biological action. Do whatever you want dude. If you want to use 17b-estradiol and turn yourself into a women that is fine too with me, you are responsible for your own health. You probably did that already lol.

[breakbot]

So how is this any different than putting Kane's RU on your head? You DON'T know what you are putting on your head either. So your statement about slamming chemicals on your head is invalid. He is following research from one of the world's top doctor Dr. Cotsarelis, so how is it all bro science? If anything, seti is more safe than RU.

I can honestly really care less if you think he is a neo-nazi or blackmailed a transgender. This is about hair loss not a drama scene.

Where do I see your against? lmao, you are on every forum saying PGD2 won't regrow hair when it's for maintenance. Then you are claiming PGE2 is is going to cause cancer, then switch to saying "well there is a risk to everything" after someone calls you out on it.

You are right. It's too risky using a drug that didn't get the fda approval.
Also nobody should care about the opinion of anybody -wannabe star through a hairloss forum(so pathetic)..

[warner8]

Has Kane actually started selling seti yet? I could not find it on the site. if yes, could someone post the link.
also will be be selling it pre-mixed like the RU or just the powder. does anyone have a recipe for the powder.

[unbalding]

Hey Swooping. I have a couple questions for you, as you seem to have done a lot of reading on cancer and PGE2. I was just looking at a couple studies last night about the role PGE2 plays in cancer growth, and I was thinking that maybe it's better to go bald than to keep putting various unproven compounds on my scalp. Now I come on here this morning and see this discussion, and needless to say it only heightened my concerns. It seems that swiss is right in that there's no evidence that PGE2 causes cancer directly, it just makes it grow once it is already there. However, the latest research seems to suggest that we all develop cancer, it just normally gets destroyed by our immune systems before it becomes a problem. This has me very concerned that introducing large amounts of PGE2 to the body will allow cancerous cells, which would normally be destroyed, to proliferate and form tumors. Is this a fair assessment to your knowledge? How large a dose of PGE2 would you be concerned about, and over what period of time? My plans were to apply 1mg/day of PGE2 for 100 days, and then if it is working to continue using it for a year. Now I am seriously considering not using it at all or only using it for 100 days.

[Swooping]

Hey Swooping. I have a couple questions for you, as you seem to have done a lot of reading on cancer and PGE2. I was just looking at a couple studies last night about the role PGE2 plays in cancer growth, and I was thinking that maybe it's better to go bald than to keep putting various unproven compounds on my scalp. Now I come on here this morning and see this discussion, and needless to say it only heightened my concerns. It seems that swiss is right in that there's no evidence that PGE2 causes cancer directly, it just makes it grow once it is already there. However, the latest research seems to suggest that we all develop cancer, it just normally gets destroyed by our immune systems before it becomes a problem. This has me very concerned that introducing large amounts of PGE2 to the body will allow cancerous cells, which would normally be destroyed, to proliferate and form tumors. Is this a fair assessment to your knowledge? How large a dose of PGE2 would you be concerned about, and over what period of time? My plans were to apply 1mg/day of PGE2 for 100 days, and then if it is working to continue using it for a year. Now I am seriously considering not using it at all or only using it for 100 days.

Unbalding my response was to post #107. I explained that the dermal papilla acts as a instructive niche for the progenitors cells in the hair follicle in post #106. In response to post #107 however I explain that he can't make such a statement. First of all you can't say that upregulation of progenitor cells will act as the cure. Cotsarelis would understand this he even mentions this in his study in 2011;

Whether the decrease in these cells is a primary or secondary event in AGA remains to be determined; however, their previously reported high proliferative potential in vitro raises the possibility that they are necessary for generation of large follicles.

After that study of Cotsarelis we have come to understand that the dermal papilla niche is regulating these progenitors. So if the dermal papilla is altered for instance as shown by other researchers it would automatically lead to a lack of progenitors. This would make the lack of progenitors a secondary event. I hope you understand this so far and everyone else. So to argue that upregulation of progenitors will lead to a cure is ridiculous.

Now he also mentioned that PGD2 down and PGE2 up needs to be done to provide a cure. Well in post #108 (https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/thread...l=1#post219757) I reply. Not with the intention of showing you that PGE2 is carcinogenic. No I reply that the guy is using many compounds that have a lot of effect on downstream pathways.

Look 17b-estradiol tends to grow awesome hair in some people. Can we shout now that 17b-estradiol is a cure now? Hell no. If we look at 17b-estradiol it has much effect on downstream pathways(1);

-P53
-Cyclin D1
-MAPK Pathway
-IGF-1
-SHH
-WNT
-EGFR
-BMP's

And many more. So (some) of these downstream pathways might be attributing to the pro-hair growth effects of 17b-estradiol. Not because 17b-estradiol binds to both estrogen receptors (ERa and ERb) in the hair follicle. Same thing with minoxidil. It grows hair but we don't understand which pathways or what mechanism is responsible for this. If we do know the pathways responsible for it we could perhaps modulate them directly which would possibly provide a far better result. However that could lead to safety concerns obviously but you get the point.

So PGE2 binds to the EP receptors and has many effect on downstream pathways too. So if we go to Garza his study; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3982925/. He says that PGE2 has pro-carcinogenic effects and links to two studies. Let's take one of these studies; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759608/. We can see that PGE2 in this study has an effect on

- Cyclin D1
- MAPK pathway
- EGFR
- Other stuff

Hey, do you see some correlations between the two compounds? Now this just acts as an example to explain things but I hope you get the point now. For instance we do know that PGF2A (bimatoprost) grows hair. Does that mean that PGF2A has a big role upstream in the pathway of AGA or acts as a cure? Nope it could have a very small role in the pathology of AGA. Yet it seems to grow hair. That seems strange right? But this can be because using a compound like PGF2A can actually have downstream effect on other pathways that DO have a bigger role upstream in the pathology of AGA.

And I repeat again we don't know what happens after AR activation. I don't concur with the whole prostaglandin hypothesis. I concur with other researchers that master regulatory pathways come into play that decide cell fate decision in the dermal papilla niche. This ultimately leads to an altered dermal papilla niche. We have seen from studies that the dermal papilla regulates hair follicle size. An altered dermal papilla niche would indeed cause a lack of progenitors. I have seen to many correlations and find the evidence of other researchers having it on the right end way way more convincing. Besides that the attention on that hypothesis overall is way more focused than the prostaglandin hypothesis. This is only my opinion. Time will tell eventually.

Hopefully you have gained a bit more insight now. After that reply of my post someone else posted that I was wrong with a total broscience response. So I just reacted to that again. Many things can act as a carcinogen that doesn't mean that they will CAUSE cancer. Read this page and understand for yourself

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/generalinformationaboutcarcinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens

Hope that helps unbalding. I wasn't trying to project fear. No, my intention was to explain that some things are far more complex than most think they are. We definitely can't look at someone his temples who grows some intermediate vellus hair by using a whole array of compounds/methods and then make a conclusive statement that this is because of upregulation of PGE2, downregulation of PGD2 and enhancing progenitors or that that will act as a cure. Thatīs pure broscience.

(1)http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/...0/er.2006-0020

[eldarlmario]

Unbalding my response was to post #107. I explained that the dermal papilla acts as a instructive niche for the progenitors cells in the hair follicle in post #106. In response to post #107 however I explain that he can't make such a statement. First of all you can't say that upregulation of progenitor cells will act as the cure. Cotsarelis would understand this he even mentions this in his study in 2011;



After that study of Cotsarelis we have come to understand that the dermal papilla niche is regulating these progenitors. So if the dermal papilla is altered for instance as shown by other researchers it would automatically lead to a lack of progenitors. This would make the lack of progenitors a secondary event. I hope you understand this so far and everyone else. So to argue that upregulation of progenitors will lead to a cure is ridiculous.

Now he also mentioned that PGD2 down and PGE2 up needs to be done to provide a cure. Well in post #108 (https://www.baldtruthtalk.com/thread...l=1#post219757) I reply. Not with the intention of showing you that PGE2 is carcinogenic. No I reply that the guy is using many compounds that have a lot of effect on downstream pathways.

Look 17b-estradiol tends to grow awesome hair in some people. Can we shout now that 17b-estradiol is a cure now? Hell no. If we look at 17b-estradiol it has much effect on downstream pathways(1);

-P53
-Cyclin D1
-MAPK Pathway
-IGF-1
-SHH
-WNT
-EGFR
-BMP's

And many more. So (some) of these downstream pathways might be attributing to the pro-hair growth effects of 17b-estradiol. Not because 17b-estradiol binds to both estrogen receptors (ERa and ERb) in the hair follicle. Same thing with minoxidil. It grows hair but we don't understand which pathways or what mechanism is responsible for this. If we do know the pathways responsible for it we could perhaps modulate them directly which would possibly provide a far better result. However that could lead to safety concerns obviously but you get the point.

So PGE2 binds to the EP receptors and has many effect on downstream pathways too. So if we go to Garza his study; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3982925/. He says that PGE2 has pro-carcinogenic effects and links to two studies. Let's take one of these studies; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759608/. We can see that PGE2 in this study has an effect on

- Cyclin D1
- MAPK pathway
- EGFR
- Other stuff

Hey, do you see some correlations between the two compounds? Now this just acts as an example to explain things but I hope you get the point now. For instance we do know that PGF2A (bimatoprost) grows hair. Does that mean that PGF2A has a big role upstream in the pathway of AGA or acts as a cure? Nope it could have a very small role in the pathology of AGA. Yet it seems to grow hair. That seems strange right? But this can be because using a compound like PGF2A can actually have downstream effect on other pathways that DO have a bigger role upstream in the pathology of AGA.

And I repeat again we don't know what happens after AR activation. I don't concur with the whole prostaglandin hypothesis. I concur with other researchers that master regulatory pathways come into play that decide cell fate decision in the dermal papilla niche. This ultimately leads to an altered dermal papilla niche. We have seen from studies that the dermal papilla regulates hair follicle size. An altered dermal papilla niche would indeed cause a lack of progenitors. I have seen to many correlations and find the evidence of other researchers having it on the right end way way more convincing. Besides that the attention on that hypothesis overall is way more focused than the prostaglandin hypothesis. This is only my opinion. Time will tell eventually.

Hopefully you have gained a bit more insight now. After that reply of my post someone else posted that I was wrong with a total broscience response. So I just reacted to that again. Many things can act as a carcinogen that doesn't mean that they will CAUSE cancer. Read this page and understand for yourself

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/generalinformationaboutcarcinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens

Hope that helps unbalding. I wasn't trying to project fear. No, my intention was to explain that some things are far more complex than most think they are. We definitely can't look at someone his temples who grows some intermediate vellus hair by using a whole array of compounds/methods and then make a conclusive statement that this is because of upregulation of PGE2, downregulation of PGD2 and enhancing progenitors or that that will act as a cure. Thatīs pure broscience.

(1)http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/...0/er.2006-0020

Hi swooping.

if u like, i can invite u to my small group and u will be able to see the list i've complied of whatever upregualtes/downregulates ALl the genes mentioned in Cosarelis's patent

[CurlyBird]

I believe minoxidil upregulates PGE2. I don't know why Swooping is saying we don't know how it works because we sort of do.

[Swooping]

Hi swooping.

if u like, i can invite u to my small group and u will be able to see the list i've complied of whatever upregualtes/downregulates ALl the genes mentioned in Cosarelis's patent

Sure, can you post it too? I'm always very interested to learn more about everything relating hair follicle biology or androgenetic alopecia. Perhaps a separate topic will do? Else we'll be going to much off topic I guess.

I believe minoxidil upregulates PGE2. I don't know why Swooping is saying we don't know how it works because we sort of do.

Ahh, so minoxidil grows hair because of PGE2? If that is what you mean and you have read the above you are short-sighted. If we go to this study from 2014 actually; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24351010

"Regenerative medicine and hair loss: how hair follicle culture has advanced our understanding of treatment options for androgenetic alopecia."

By A.M Christiano & Higgins.

They write some things about minoxidil. I quote from the executive summary;

"Minoxidil may act on dermal papilla cells by phospholyrating ERK and AKT and by increasing BCL-2:Bax ratio"
"Minoxidil may also upregulate adenosine, which in turn is capable of inducing several hair growth related genes such as FGF7"

Frankly they don't even mention anything about PGE2. However besides this I can tell you that Minoxidil has shown to do many things which may explain why it works. As upregulating several growth factors, activating b-catenin in DPC, downregulating P53 and P27 and some other things. Again, it's way more complex than you think they are. But what do you know? Not much it seems. Anyway, let's stay on topic now.