All we need to know about Bimatoprost for regrowth
- Thread starter Rabid
- Start date
- Status
smitysmity
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Bimatoprost is probably the most expensive solution on the market right now for both anti androgens and growth stimulants.
Here are the costs
Latisse
Latisse is a licensed brand made in a first world country which runs for around $100 a bottle. It would end up costing you around $1,000 a month if you use pure latisse.
Generic Latisse
Lumigen, which is a non licensed generic brand of Latisse made in a 3rd world country runs for around $10 a bottle. It contains 3ML per bottle. If you use 1ML a day, then you're paying around $100 a month.
Pure Bimatoprost Cost
Pure Bimatoprost without a solution which is also non licensed and made in a 3rd world country runs for around $600 per 200mg. If you were to use just 0.3mg per ml, then the cost would run you around $27 a month.
I get this number from the following math
0.3mg a day = 667 days of Bimatoprost
30 Days in a Month = 22.233 Months of Bimatoprost
$600 Divide By 22.233 Months = $26.99 A Month
So yes, it is significantly cheaper using pure Bimatoprost and I highly doubt that the Lumigen is anymore "real" bimatoprost than pure Bimatoprost being that they are both unlicensed third party countries producing both.
End Result: You're spending roughly 3X to 4X more money buying Generic Latisse than Bimatoprost.
I myself am using about 1mg a day. I will need to increase that to roughly 2mg soon because I am not seeing much hair growth using a 0.3 to 0.5 solution. I am measuring this by the end of hairs that fall out to the top of the hair and see simply that the hair is colored differently but the growth is not noticeable.
Here are the costs
Latisse
Latisse is a licensed brand made in a first world country which runs for around $100 a bottle. It would end up costing you around $1,000 a month if you use pure latisse.
Generic Latisse
Lumigen, which is a non licensed generic brand of Latisse made in a 3rd world country runs for around $10 a bottle. It contains 3ML per bottle. If you use 1ML a day, then you're paying around $100 a month.
Pure Bimatoprost Cost
Pure Bimatoprost without a solution which is also non licensed and made in a 3rd world country runs for around $600 per 200mg. If you were to use just 0.3mg per ml, then the cost would run you around $27 a month.
I get this number from the following math
0.3mg a day = 667 days of Bimatoprost
30 Days in a Month = 22.233 Months of Bimatoprost
$600 Divide By 22.233 Months = $26.99 A Month
So yes, it is significantly cheaper using pure Bimatoprost and I highly doubt that the Lumigen is anymore "real" bimatoprost than pure Bimatoprost being that they are both unlicensed third party countries producing both.
End Result: You're spending roughly 3X to 4X more money buying Generic Latisse than Bimatoprost.
I myself am using about 1mg a day. I will need to increase that to roughly 2mg soon because I am not seeing much hair growth using a 0.3 to 0.5 solution. I am measuring this by the end of hairs that fall out to the top of the hair and see simply that the hair is colored differently but the growth is not noticeable.
thinninghairsucks
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 3
why is everyone talking about price per gram... has anyone in the uk done a search for this ?
google "buy Bimatoprost".... and first thing that comes up is " Bimatoprost 300micrograms/ml / Timolol 5mg/ml eye drops " loydspharmacy
which is a big pharmacy in uk
google "buy Bimatoprost".... and first thing that comes up is " Bimatoprost 300micrograms/ml / Timolol 5mg/ml eye drops " loydspharmacy
which is a big pharmacy in uk
smitysmity
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
thinninghairsucks said:
1). 0.03% is not enough solution for hair follicles.
2). $10 for a 3oz generic brand Bimatoprost is 4X the cost of buying the powder and making your own solution.
... and you need a prescription for lloydspharmacy.
Not many doctors in the UK are going to prescribe you bimatoprost for hairloss. I'm certainly not going to ask my GP about it, he'd probably think I'm a nut and cut off my finasteride prescription!
Not many doctors in the UK are going to prescribe you bimatoprost for hairloss. I'm certainly not going to ask my GP about it, he'd probably think I'm a nut and cut off my finasteride prescription!
thinninghairsucks
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 3
Yeh but its also used to relive eye pressure in the form of eye drops
Slowly digging through this thread, for the folks trying bimatoprost, is the final concentration applied usually 0.05%?
Noticed Allergan just patented formulations for liquid/gel/foam forms here: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0124736.html (also attached in PDF form)
The composition is very simple, but the concentration they use appears quite high, mostly in the 0.2-0.3% range
Noticed Allergan just patented formulations for liquid/gel/foam forms here: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0124736.html (also attached in PDF form)
The composition is very simple, but the concentration they use appears quite high, mostly in the 0.2-0.3% range
There does not seem to be much evidence that anti-androgens alone will provide much regrowth for those with significant hair loss. Thus, some sort of hair growth stimulation is required, be it Minoxidil, Bimatoprost or an Azole.
I agree regarding the long-term problems with Minoxidil, even topical, especially with concentrations greater than 5%.
Thus, my hopes are with Bimatoprost and Azoles along with topical AAs.
I agree regarding the long-term problems with Minoxidil, even topical, especially with concentrations greater than 5%.
Thus, my hopes are with Bimatoprost and Azoles along with topical AAs.
smitysmity
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
My understanding is that the reason why an anti androgen won't regrow your hair is because
1). It isn't a growth stimulant
2). It's meant to protect your hair from DHT that has been attacking your hair since you were born.
3). The workhorse cells that are secondary cells are dying which causes this disease which were used to actually help regrow our hair before when DHT was attacking it
Without a growth stimulant, you have nothing to replace what those workhorse cells were able to do before which summarizes why you need BOTH a growth stimulant and an anti androgen in your regimen if you want to stop hair loss otherwise you'll eventually lose it.
1). It isn't a growth stimulant
2). It's meant to protect your hair from DHT that has been attacking your hair since you were born.
3). The workhorse cells that are secondary cells are dying which causes this disease which were used to actually help regrow our hair before when DHT was attacking it
Without a growth stimulant, you have nothing to replace what those workhorse cells were able to do before which summarizes why you need BOTH a growth stimulant and an anti androgen in your regimen if you want to stop hair loss otherwise you'll eventually lose it.
KiLLuMiNaTi
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 3
This might turn out cheaper than we think. Look what Ive found on the alldaychemist website. They say you use it once daily for 14 to 16 weeks, then you can cut down use to once a week. Do you guys think that would work for the scalp as well? If so it would turn out to be much cheaper than we thought, in the long run.
How to use Careprost to increase lash length:
Apply one drop of Careprost on a disposable eyeliner applicator brush and draw along the upper eyelid lash line. Carefully blot off any excess that may have dripped beyond the upper eyelid. Do not apply to the lower lash line. Repeat for the other eye.
Apply once a day until the desired length is achieved. Results are usually apparent in about eight weeks, and the desired length is usually achieved in 14 to 16 weeks.
Once the desired length is achieved, maintain the new lashes by applying Careprost once a week. The once-a-week treatment is necessary for maintaining the new length because after use is discontinued, eyelashes will revert back to their normal growth patterns.
How to use Careprost to increase lash length:
Apply one drop of Careprost on a disposable eyeliner applicator brush and draw along the upper eyelid lash line. Carefully blot off any excess that may have dripped beyond the upper eyelid. Do not apply to the lower lash line. Repeat for the other eye.
Apply once a day until the desired length is achieved. Results are usually apparent in about eight weeks, and the desired length is usually achieved in 14 to 16 weeks.
Once the desired length is achieved, maintain the new lashes by applying Careprost once a week. The once-a-week treatment is necessary for maintaining the new length because after use is discontinued, eyelashes will revert back to their normal growth patterns.
Hum, I thought I posted something here yesterday but it did not succeed.
Anyway, I had a talk with a very prominent Dermatologist that I was hoping might have a reliable source for Bimatoprost. He told me that he experimented with 0.03% solution several years ago and did not have very good results. I did not press him further as it also apparent he was using a commercially available opthamologic source.
This Doctor also maintained Bimatoprost was better at "lengthening" than "thickening" and I did not press him on this as well and tend to not agree. Its also possible his experience did not include combining Bimatoprost with an AA or such.
Clearly, 0.03% is not going to be very effective for hair regrowth. I am using just under 0.09% and once my shed stopped, seemed back on the path to something.
I would go up to 0.12% given a reliable source. Higher than that I have my concerns. Just because the patent has high concentrations does not mean one is required. Allergan could be just covering all bases or even send out a red herring.
Anyway, I had a talk with a very prominent Dermatologist that I was hoping might have a reliable source for Bimatoprost. He told me that he experimented with 0.03% solution several years ago and did not have very good results. I did not press him further as it also apparent he was using a commercially available opthamologic source.
This Doctor also maintained Bimatoprost was better at "lengthening" than "thickening" and I did not press him on this as well and tend to not agree. Its also possible his experience did not include combining Bimatoprost with an AA or such.
Clearly, 0.03% is not going to be very effective for hair regrowth. I am using just under 0.09% and once my shed stopped, seemed back on the path to something.
I would go up to 0.12% given a reliable source. Higher than that I have my concerns. Just because the patent has high concentrations does not mean one is required. Allergan could be just covering all bases or even send out a red herring.
longhair1983
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 4
it sound like you are trying to say "drugs usually sow linear characteristics". Regardless, you never know whether it is linear or nonlinear for Bimatoprost until you test it.debris said:
Dose-reponse curves are not linear, although sometimes in the therapeutic range they may appear to be linear if the dose-response is relatively shallow.
We don't know Bimatoprost's dose-response curve. If flat, and assuming 0.03% is in the therapeutic range, than 0.06%, 0.09% even 0.15% is not going to make much difference. One might even speculate that 0.5% would not be significantly more effective in that case.
However, if the dose-response curve is steep, a higher dose could provide a significantly more effective response.
We don't know, other than that anecdotal reports indicate that 0.03% is not strong enough for cosmetically meaningful scalp hair regrowth.
100 mg per month at 2X per day in 1 ml of vehicle is roughly 0.19%.
Find me a gram of Bimatoprost for $1200 and an independent testing source and I will do that.
We don't know Bimatoprost's dose-response curve. If flat, and assuming 0.03% is in the therapeutic range, than 0.06%, 0.09% even 0.15% is not going to make much difference. One might even speculate that 0.5% would not be significantly more effective in that case.
However, if the dose-response curve is steep, a higher dose could provide a significantly more effective response.
We don't know, other than that anecdotal reports indicate that 0.03% is not strong enough for cosmetically meaningful scalp hair regrowth.
100 mg per month at 2X per day in 1 ml of vehicle is roughly 0.19%.
Find me a gram of Bimatoprost for $1200 and an independent testing source and I will do that.
BenVegas01
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
This is my take on it.
Latanoprost is a PG analog like Bimatoprost and the studys have shown it to be highly dose dependant. So theres not much doubt that BIM is dose dependant. Latanoprost is used for glaucoma patients at a dose of 0.005% Eye Drops Solution compared to Bimatoprost where a .03%. dosage is used.
When tested on monkeys, the Latanoprost showed little difference with the standard dose (.005%) but when taken to .05% there was moderate to marked regrowth. Thats a 10 x increase in dose.
Now If you take the standard eye drop dose of .03% Bimatoprost and multiply it by 10 you get a .3% (3mg per 1 ml) solution. Its no surprise then, that that is one of the main dosages that Allergan are testing, and they also state that a specialised vehicle is needed to penetrate the scalp - which is not what the standard .03% latisse solution was designed for. So i don't understand that Derm writing Bimatoprost off the results from a solution that was not at all designed for hairloss.
Having said that, Dr Bauman compared latisse it to 2% minoxidil. If that is true, then we should start to see some significant results when we get into an effective treatment range.
Just as an example - say the .3% BIM solution is equal to minoxidil 5%. If you diluted minoxidil by 10x to make a .5% dose and put it in that eye drop solution - what kind of results are you going to get? When something is dose dependant and not a flat response - its all about right dose and risk / benifit ratio.
Im going to use a dose of 2mg to 3mg (.2% - .3%) once per day now and see how that goes. Im confident that will produce some noticeable growth, if the product we are using is pure.
Latanoprost is a PG analog like Bimatoprost and the studys have shown it to be highly dose dependant. So theres not much doubt that BIM is dose dependant. Latanoprost is used for glaucoma patients at a dose of 0.005% Eye Drops Solution compared to Bimatoprost where a .03%. dosage is used.
When tested on monkeys, the Latanoprost showed little difference with the standard dose (.005%) but when taken to .05% there was moderate to marked regrowth. Thats a 10 x increase in dose.
Now If you take the standard eye drop dose of .03% Bimatoprost and multiply it by 10 you get a .3% (3mg per 1 ml) solution. Its no surprise then, that that is one of the main dosages that Allergan are testing, and they also state that a specialised vehicle is needed to penetrate the scalp - which is not what the standard .03% latisse solution was designed for. So i don't understand that Derm writing Bimatoprost off the results from a solution that was not at all designed for hairloss.
Having said that, Dr Bauman compared latisse it to 2% minoxidil. If that is true, then we should start to see some significant results when we get into an effective treatment range.
Just as an example - say the .3% BIM solution is equal to minoxidil 5%. If you diluted minoxidil by 10x to make a .5% dose and put it in that eye drop solution - what kind of results are you going to get? When something is dose dependant and not a flat response - its all about right dose and risk / benifit ratio.
Im going to use a dose of 2mg to 3mg (.2% - .3%) once per day now and see how that goes. Im confident that will produce some noticeable growth, if the product we are using is pure.
I think a lot depends on the individual's response. A few minoxidil users see no response. A few see a response, step up to 15% and see no further improvement. A few keep seeing further gains as they increase the number of daily applications well beyond three, but eventually run up against sides. Sides have not been reported with bim as a hair loss treatment, so as was mentioned, what we're up against right now is cost and assurance of purity.
BenVegas01
Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Rabid said:
Yeah man, i agree with this. It is expensive, and to increase the dose of an unknown product is risky. But I think we may have been a bit out with the initial thoughts of comparing strengths with the Latanoprost study.
Are you having any results with Bimatoprost so far?
smitysmity
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
We keep mentioning that 0.03 is not going to be effective yet people seem to keep ignoring it and buying it anyway. Considering how expensive Bimatoprost is, you're wasting your money.
smitysmity
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
BenVegas01 said:
Bimatoprost is proven to the point Allergen is trying to rush in order to get a hair loss growth stimulant solution on the market which could take 1 to 10 years to actually come out.
- Status