Man made hair follicle model that functions like real hair!

[tonypizza]

*sigh*

[elvispresley]

there's currently nothing available that works at stopping hair loss better than finasteride. it gets a terrible rep which is unjustified IMO. anti-depressants can cause seizures and permanent brain damage but you never hear about it

ok. i said regrowth. anyway i already expressed all my thinking in the post . have a good day everybody.
finasteride is the past. imho.

[clandestine]

This is the Cutting Edge section of the forum.

Why must every discussion end up on finasteride? Really, fukc finasteride, and stop talking about it in Cutting Edge Future Treatments.

[joely]

Going to be siding with clandestine on this one folks, it really grips my sh!t that almost every thread on cutting edge turns into a row over fin! If you want to discuss it go to the fin thread!

good day to you sir

[UK_]

Like someone said, propecia is really the devil's medicine for hair loss. I'm still proud I made the decision (along with my GP and my dermatologist) never to touch it, but I respect people who chose to take it.

On top of the hair loss fight? Maybe, but at what price? You don't know what you're looking at in the long or even short-term? As Spencer often says on the show "I don't know if I'm gonna get some bizarre form of cancer". I hate when I read spooky stories about minoxidil (which I'm using) like facial aging but, you can wake up in a few months and notice your chest is swollen, you can find yourself in bed with a girl and not be able to keep it up etc. So yeah, you propecia users are all very brave, but you make it sound like non-users are such pussies for not taking a drug who could make them impotent, grow boobs or make their balls ache, and I don't like it.

The day I woke up and was unable to get an erection no matter how hard I tried or whatever I did was probably the scariest moment of my life.

I thank flying **** I returned to baseline a few days later and gradually improved over the following weeks.

Never will I touch propecia again, it will end up like Accutane and withdrawn from the market eventually.

On another note, if they're able to build a working follicle why cant they just mass-produce them and allow people to supplement transplants with their 'organic follicle' structures?? I'm sure there are plenty of millionaires who would pay for this technology, and eventually the price should drop and be affordable for us losers too.

[stilltrying]

Although it does seem like a nice step, it's hard to tell what consequences it will have in speeding up research on AGA. Like many here I feel that it's going to be too late for me anyway, cause I want hair now while I'm young (24) and don't think I would care about it so much by the time I'm 40.

Sorry for going off-topic to react to an earlier post down here, but the statement was so bold that I can't ignore it.

If finasteride is an option to save your hair, then so is chopping your balls off.

That's really no comparison. Finasteride does not reduce DHT in the body by 100% and it does not reduce testosterone; in fact a consequence I believe is often seen is that testosterone increases. So the perception that finasteride would make a man "less man" is a bit exaggerated in my opinion.

I personally believe that for a certain group of people finasteride may have health benefits; after all, if your body is overly sensitive to DHT in general or your DHT is too high then I think it's not entirely stupid to reduce the amount of it, especially considering the associations between prostate-related diseases and the role of DHT. It's only hard to tell when this is the case. On top of that, the enzyme targeted by DHT also has other functions in the body that are not fully understood. So of course taking finasteride is a dangerous gamble, but it doesn't come close to cutting your balls off.

[UK_]

stilltrying, they've recently found that 5AR type II receptors are located on motor neuron cells throughout the spinal cord, this one of the reasons they're using to explain all the cognitive effects associated with Fin use.

I'd stick to RU instead of Fin personally. The reason being is that the 5AR molecule is involved in the conversion of other neurosteroids which you do need.

[stilltrying]

stilltrying, they've recently found that 5AR type II receptors are located on motor neuron cells throughout the spinal cord, this one of the reasons they're using to explain all the cognitive effects associated with Fin use.

Interesting, hadn't read that yet. But for some reason a certain group of people does appear to be less prone to side effects and I would really like to know which conditions influence that.

I'd stick to RU instead of Fin personally. The reason being is that the 5AR molecule is involved in the conversion of other neurosteroids which you do need.

I don't use either of them at the moment. Considering the statistical data on side effects of finasteride, the absence of statistical data on side effects of RU and the uncertainty about purity and availability of RU supplies, I would personally currently prefer finasteride to RU.

Sorry for the off-topic post, can't post more about this here!

[Dan26]

That's really no comparison. Finasteride does not reduce DHT in the body by 100% and it does not reduce testosterone; in fact a consequence I believe is often seen is that testosterone increases. So the perception that finasteride would make a man "less man" is a bit exaggerated in my opinion.

Total testosterone is increased on fin, but bio-available testosterone is decreased

[burtandernie]

Given current treatments I think a lot of guys are perfectly justified just living with MPB for now its still by far the safest and least expensive option. Taking a drug for your whole life is bad I mean we learn that in like 4th grade. No one knows what it does over 20 years. I would much more worried about undocumented things then something like impotence.

[fred970]

and don't think I would care about it so much by the time I'm 40.

I'll tell you right away, you will care. Even at 50 you will care, at 80, you will always care about your hair. I know that because my father is 51 and still hasn't removed his hair piece once in his life. One of Europe's top HT surgeon (Dr. Bisanga) told me that it's not true, people think they will not care once they are 40, like one day you wake up and you suddenly don't care about your appearance, it's almost never the case. If you care now, you will always care.

[Conpecia]

On another note, if they're able to build a working follicle why cant they just mass-produce them and allow people to supplement transplants with their 'organic follicle' structures?? I'm sure there are plenty of millionaires who would pay for this technology, and eventually the price should drop and be affordable for us losers too.

Uh... THIS!!!

[hellouser]

On another note, if they're able to build a working follicle why cant they just mass-produce them and allow people to supplement transplants with their 'organic follicle' structures?? I'm sure there are plenty of millionaires who would pay for this technology, and eventually the price should drop and be affordable for us losers too.

LMAO! That actually made me laugh out loud

Send a memo to LeBron James*, this dude is very VERY self conscious about his hair and hairline, I'm sure he'd pay good cash for the development of a treatment. But the real reason is that Dr. Lauster just doesn't give a fvck. He's been sitting on the cure for the last 3 years and has done JACK SHIT.

Note; the asterisk is for his championships via collusion.

[john2399]

I'll tell you right away, you will care. Even at 50 you will care, at 80, you will always care about your hair. I know that because my father is 51 and still hasn't removed his hair piece once in his life. One of Europe's top HT surgeon (Dr. Bisanga) told me that it's not true, people think they will not care once they are 40, like one day you wake up and you suddenly don't care about your appearance, it's almost never the case. If you care now, you will always care.

Def not true. Hairloss at 40 or 50 years old is nothing compared to hairloss in your 20s. If a man can not get over hairloss at that age then i feel real sorry for him.

[hellouser]

Def not true. Hairloss at 40 or 50 years old is nothing compared to hairloss in your 20s. If a man can not get over hairloss at that age then i feel real sorry for him.

That's a pretty ignorant stance. Essentially what youre saying is that those who have been robbed of their identity with male pattern baldness, should suck it up.

I see that you've made a number of these complacent comments, almost makes me wonder why youre even in the cutting edge forum.