Dermarolling Community Trial

[Bocaj]

^ Thank you Obama.

[hellouser]

^ Thank you Obama.

Out with the old, in with the new. Its not like 8,000 jobs will no longer be available. And why should treatments continue to exist when we should be pushing for CURES?

[Bocaj]

Oh it's worse than just 8,000 jobs..and it's been that way for years now. And going to part-time.

I'm not a Merck/drug company fan at all btw.

[Conpecia]

just finished session lucky number 7. man, what an alpha treatment. really takes some jewels to see your scalp get shredded like that.

still no results but not expecting anything for a while.

[Conpecia]

by the way, bigentries, those photos in the study were taken at 8 months, not 3 months.

[UK_]

^ Thank you Obama.

Oh yes because the one thing we need is more tax cuts for the American ultra-class.

The rich of America are living in a different universe of wealth and hyper-opulence, and no, it doesnt trickle down and make the poor better off, dont peddle that 80's myth.

[bigentries]

by the way, bigentries, those photos in the study were taken at 8 months, not 3 months.

Where does it says that? I can't find it anywhere in the study. The photos clearly state they are "baseline" and 12 weeks pictures

They only mention retrospective questioning, nothing about when the pics were taken

[PatientlyWaiting]

Never tried.

However, Merck just announced theyre cutting costs, 2.5 billion and cutting 8,000+ jobs.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-business/us-business/merck-to-slash-8500-jobs-looks-to-cut-25-billion-in-costs-annually/article14621267/

That put a big smile on my face. All the more reason for a superior alternative to Fin.

I should mention though that any results I may have now are going to be slow to be seen as I endured a long and REALLY BAD shed for about 3+ months.

A slightly superior alternative to fin is dutasteride, in terms of results. But I know what you mean, the negative side effects. Why don't you give dutasteride a try? At least one 0.5mg pill a week, it's better than nothing at all. Then after a month you do 2 a week, then 3 a week, etc.

[hellouser]

A slightly superior alternative to fin is dutasteride, in terms of results. But I know what you mean, the negative side effects. Why don't you give dutasteride a try? At least one 0.5mg pill a week, it's better than nothing at all. Then after a month you do 2 a week, then 3 a week, etc.

Would rather give Fin a go... but once a week. Spencer Kobren is on it once a week. With the topical applications of CB, Minox and RU (gonna be back on it soon) as well as Dermarolling and Nizoral, I should do well.

[Bocaj]

Oh yes because the one thing we need is more tax cuts for the American ultra-class.

The rich of America are living in a different universe of wealth and hyper-opulence, and no, it doesnt trickle down and make the poor better off, dont peddle that 80's myth.

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa the rich. Waaaaaaaaa they only pay the vast majority of taxes. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Tax cuts for all. The 80's kicked ass. Of course we're getting ours kicked now..when it should be Obama's.

[greatjob!]

Oh yes because the one thing we need is more tax cuts for the American ultra-class.

The rich of America are living in a different universe of wealth and hyper-opulence, and no, it doesnt trickle down and make the poor better off, dont peddle that 80's myth.

+1

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa the rich. Waaaaaaaaa they only pay the vast majority of taxes. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Tax cuts for all. The 80's kicked ass. Of course we're getting ours kicked now..when it should be Obama's.

Shut up and go turn on Hannity and let them feed you some mindless propaganda to perpetuate your delusion of reality. This is a hairloss forum not a "I'm losing my hair because of Obama" forum. Go back to blaming everything in the world on Obama, "OMG I stubbed my toe must be Obama and those damned Mexicans", and let the adults discuss hairloss.

[Bocaj]

+1



Shut up and go turn on Hannity and let them feed you some mindless propaganda to perpetuate your delusion of reality. This is a hairloss forum not a "I'm losing my hair because of Obama" forum. Go back to blaming everything in the world on Obama, "OMG I stubbed my toe must be Obama and those damned Mexicans", and let the adults discuss hairloss.

And there it is folks. Already telling me to shut up. It's either that or name calling. And where did I say I'm losing my hair because of Obama? We're losing plenty of other things..but hair....? Reread my Obama reference..and what I was responding to. K?

But now that you bring it up..it's Obama blaming everything on everybody else.

[Bocaj]

just finished session lucky number 7. man, what an alpha treatment. really takes some jewels to see your scalp get shredded like that.

still no results but not expecting anything for a while.

So that's 7 weeks, right?

[UK_]

Waaaaaaaaaaaaa the rich. Waaaaaaaaa they only pay the vast majority of taxes. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaa


Tax cuts for all. The 80's kicked ass. Of course we're getting ours kicked now..when it should be Obama's.

Starbucks infested the UK years ago, they've singlehandedly wiped out thousands of local businesses (soft competitors) and put many thousands more out of work - despite all of their greed & destruction to what were prosperous and loved local high street businesses they've paid only £8.6 million in tax since they've been in the UK.

Your counter-argument is that we should allow these corporations to avoid tax b/c they provide jobs and economic growth blah blah blah - as if the demand for coffee would be non-existent without their presence, and allowing multi-nationals to avoid tax while they throat-fcuk local businesses who are required to pay tax by law is hardly fair now is it?

[Knockin on NW4]

Starbucks infested the UK years ago, they've singlehandedly wiped out thousands of local businesses (soft competitors) and put many thousands more out of work - despite all of their greed & destruction to what were prosperous and loved local high street businesses they've paid only £8.6 million in tax since they've been in the UK.

Your counter-argument is that we should allow these corporations to avoid tax b/c they provide jobs and economic growth blah blah blah - as if the demand for coffee would be non-existent without their presence, and allowing multi-nationals to avoid tax while they throat-fcuk local businesses who are required to pay tax by law is hardly fair now is it?

the customer decides to drink starbucks because their coffee is deliciuos... whats evil about that? if mom and pop could make better coffee and do it as efficiently as starbucks, then the consumer would spend their money with the little guys...


no one forces u or anyone else to support these “evil" corporations. they are just really good at what hey do. If u think u can do it better, whats stopping you from starting a coffee company???