I think I've hacked it

[TheKingofFighters]

hi so is the AR inhibitor u're talking about the cure?

[Kokles]

Is it so hard to take and post pictures? A visible improvement in hair density is what we're after. I've had insanely great results with minoxidil alone.. even smudgy old phone photos shown massive overall increase in density.

Swiss posted pictures and they are beyond laughable.. he also thinks he "hacked" it

[Kokles]

Is it so hard to take and post pictures? A visible improvement in hair density is what we're after. I've had insanely great results with minoxidil alone.. even smudgy old phone photos shown massive overall increase in density.

Swiss posted pictures and they are beyond laughable.. he also thinks he "hacked" it

[fred970]

Is it so hard to take and post pictures? A visible improvement in hair density is what we're after. I've had insanely great results with minoxidil alone.. even smudgy old phone photos shown massive overall increase in density.

Swiss posted pictures and they are beyond laughable.. he also thinks he "hacked" it

This, it would be so easy to post results if these people had any.

[Hemo]

Sure pictures can help but it doesn't mean people have to be d*cks about it, brushing him off as a troll or trying to sell anything right off the bat in the very first page. Some people just like seeing the bad everyone, they don't give anyone the benefit of the doubt. Anyway, he says this is far away from even being done at all, so just the theory alone was interesting. What's pictures gonna do, make this thread another 50 page thread of members talking about how a better treatment is near 10 years from now? That is why I post on this site 2-3 times a year now, because every thread is all about treatments that are coming 5 years from now but then those treatments get pushed back to another 5-10 years. What happened to all those treatments that were being talked about, and there was pictures for them? They're not even mentioned here anymore. Pictures can mean something or they can mean nothing. His findings, in theory, are better than pictures. I mean i'm not going ot sit here and claim I understand everything the guy wrote, but I did read the entire thing and it was interesting and I kinda get the concept he is talking about.

Yes, but his/her last post was largely about the amount of effort that goes into this kind of research/discovery, only to be snubbed by the scientific community and public. If there's proof (e.g. pictures), that is one hell of a way to convince people.

Even if we knew it would take another 5-10 years, at least we know it's coming.

[sdsurfin]

You ranted a lot about the scientific process but did not address any one of my points about your science. Also, propecia is very effective at stopping hair loss in most people who take it (like 80 percent or something). If non-androgen compounds were so important to turning on the AR and the balding process, then why is this true? Also again, why does your theory imply that replicel "won't work"? if the problem lies in the AR, then surely replacing AR sensitive cells with new ones is a good idea. So is something like histogen which essentially drowns out the AR's signals. You make very sweeping statements about what will and wont work, and then show no proof that your ideas work at all. It's very hard to take any of this seriously when you have no evidence, even if your idea is legit, which it might be. How is this supposed to be useful to anyone if you don't put it into action? I don't think you're trying to make money (though maybe you should be). If you have proof that it works and can get hair scientists to back you up, I'm sure with some effort you could get things rolling somewhere, even if its japan or europe and not is the US.

[jamesst11]

You ranted a lot about the scientific process but did not address any one of my points about your science. Also, propecia is very effective at stopping hair loss in most people who take it (like 80 percent or something). If non-androgen compounds were so important to turning on the AR and the balding process, then why is this true? Also again, why does your theory imply that replicel "won't work"? if the problem lies in the AR, then surely replacing AR sensitive cells with new ones is a good idea. So is something like histogen which essentially drowns out the AR's signals. You make very sweeping statements about what will and wont work, and then show no proof that your ideas work at all. It's very hard to take any of this seriously when you have no evidence, even if your idea is legit, which it might be. How is this supposed to be useful to anyone if you don't put it into action? I don't think you're trying to make money (though maybe you should be). If you have proof that it works and can get hair scientists to back you up, I'm sure with some effort you could get things rolling somewhere, even if its japan or europe and not is the US.

propecia is not 80% effective in stopping hair loss... that's complete BS

[Tenma]

propecia is not 80% effective in stopping hair loss... that's complete BS

youre right james, propecia stops the balding process in 90+ percent of people, not only 80% LOL

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21910805

[doinmyheadin]

You ranted a lot about the scientific process but did not address any one of my points about your science. Also, propecia is very effective at stopping hair loss in most people who take it (like 80 percent or something). If non-androgen compounds were so important to turning on the AR and the balding process, then why is this true? Also again, why does your theory imply that replicel "won't work"? if the problem lies in the AR, then surely replacing AR sensitive cells with new ones is a good idea. So is something like histogen which essentially drowns out the AR's signals. You make very sweeping statements about what will and wont work, and then show no proof that your ideas work at all. It's very hard to take any of this seriously when you have no evidence, even if your idea is legit, which it might be. How is this supposed to be useful to anyone if you don't put it into action? I don't think you're trying to make money (though maybe you should be). If you have proof that it works and can get hair scientists to back you up, I'm sure with some effort you could get things rolling somewhere, even if its japan or europe and not is the US.

What happened with Follicept?

[xHELLSEHERx]

youre right james, propecia stops the balding process in 90+ percent of people, not only 80% LOL

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21910805

It didn't help me at all! To see any result you need 3 to 6 months, then after 1/2 years it does not work for most guys. That is my observation. Maybe wrong, or right!

[Spaceboy]

Yeah, the 90+% wake up feeling like shit and can't get it up/gyno too. Fin definitely can help/work to halt or slow the inevitable , but for a lot of people that comes at a steep price.

[jamesst11]

youre right james, propecia stops the balding process in 90+ percent of people, not only 80% LOL

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21910805

I have thoroughly read hundreds of research papers and published articles through my 6 years attaining my masters degree in cellular and molecular bio, and have even published two myself. I know for a fact that this is complete bullshit.

[jamesst11]

I would say that propecia HELPS MAINTAIN in 50-60% of people who regularly use it and can bare the side effects. That is more accurate.

[Justinian]

I would say that propecia HELPS MAINTAIN in 50-60% of people who regularly use it and can bare the side effects. That is more accurate.

Do you have facts to back that up with?

[jamesst11]

nope, that's why I prefaced that statement with, "i would say"... believe what you want to man, but 80-90% is WAY OFF.