- Reaction score
- 1,325
I wouldn't put HRT beyond science.But if you’ve already crossed the Rubicon by using estrogens (implying you’ve tried everything with good scientific support and are now looking beyond that)…then sure
I wouldn't put HRT beyond science.But if you’ve already crossed the Rubicon by using estrogens (implying you’ve tried everything with good scientific support and are now looking beyond that)…then sure
Having studies available is not so obvious.Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?
Coming into 2022, there is no problems getting studies on anything for free on the Internet. If it's published and peer reviewed, it can be accessed and discussed already. This is actually another powerful weapon in this community to constantly sleuth for new studies on cancer related drugs benefiting hair loss and post them in the "New Research, Studies, and Technologies", this very same section you are posting in.Having studies available is not so obvious.
obviously I am not under the illusion that something can come out of this forum before the researchers get there, I just say that many research threads are very interesting and broaden the vision, it does not detract from the fact that afterwards we can get to use compounds in a more conscious way.
an investigation and discussion thread that manages to link all the most interesting researches that are posted would not be bad at all, I'm just proposing
how can we preserve the hf before it comes out? I am using the famous big 3 and the microneedlerI came up roughly with the same landing date: 2025. You will probably get a more impressive regrowth if your HF don't continue to be damaged in the interim.
thanks. there is nothing new here. these are the limitations of SMI vs HMI and the people using SMI know those too.page 3 of the patent:
At least, what you are doing is more than most people are doing here. If you are interested to jump on topical I posted my suggestions in the ARV-110 gb thread:how can we preserve the hf before it comes out? I am using the famous big 3 and the microneedler
You think oral finasteride is enough for preservation in the meantime?At least, what you are doing is more than most people are doing here. If you are interested to jump on topical I posted my suggestions in the ARV-110 gb thread:
if merely paraphrasing the original researchers' own doubts and uncertainties about metabolism and dosing is "killing it in the nest"...
then the idea was kind of dead on arrival
anybody that disagrees can still just grab a few people to try it out
a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be
and then if they wanted to do a service to the community beyond trying to grow their own hair, they could share their journals/logging/analysis of their group experiment
That doesn't sound unusual from an early drug. I am personally on 3 drugs that have this limitation today. People from this forum experimenting with those today is again, the true value of this community. Of mice and men. We won't let the rodents have it only if it has potential on us too. We just want to know earlier than the labs can move things. Bravo people.Right, some people were aware of these issues and hoped that SMI overcomes them
(edit: I do question how many of the participants actually were aware of this, given the attempts in this thread to chill discussion)
Not saying that's dumb, I just don't see how that's likely in the absence of dosage and pk information unless explicitly accounted for in a group experiment...
These quotes demonstrate that you're effectively taking the uncertainties of one preclinical drug (HMI) and multiplying them by those of another preclinical drug (SMI):
-"future structural modifications of SMI-6 should be undertaken so as to increase its therapeutic window"
-"This report represents an early pre-clinical phase"
-"should be further optimized and improved before it can be considered as therapeutics"
-"a more complete characterization of the pharmacodynamics and metabolic stability of SMI-6"
-"a determination of its oral deliverability"
-"resolution of the exact mechanism which governs the PRLR independent anti-tumorigenic action of SMI-6"
that's a very loaded question.Some folks who start balding can stay nw0 for at least a decade on it. So yes, it's possible. Or minoxidil, or both or the big 3, etc. It all depends how your hair loss is aggressive and when you are catching up with it. There are no miracles today. Some people are forced to use heavier weapons to fight Androgenetic Alopecia.You think oral finasteride is enough for preservation in the meantime?
(although somehow there are people with routines like RU + E2 on this site...always wondered what got them there)
for group testing of any other non-androgenic pathway treatments, I'd normally agree
but a DIY experiment with HMI (and thus SMI) has completely different starting priors that make it much easier than testing e.g. SM0554:
1. can grow hair in completely bald areas
2. strong effect timeframe is 3-6 months
3. works in almost everyone
4. no obvious notable safety concerns
under those assumptions, even a single person should be able to make a guess at a starting oral/topical/injection dosage and keep escalating it every few months, periodically checking to see if their temples actually grow any new terminal hairs...
and with 20 people and 12 months (changing doses every 2 months) you could test out 100+ different dosages and see if even a single person who's maxed out on other treatments grows hair, to confirm that SMI works...
and if 12 months goes by and nobody has results, assume it doesn't work
Don't worry Charlie, there are still people in the group that you joined and left, testing SMI right now, just for you to know if it works or not one day. So you can add it to your NAC and sulforaphane topical.agreed yeah, under more realistic assumptions it's an obvious pass
but using their listed assumptions, it could be a reasonable thing to try...
and then their logic quickly stops making sense again - why go to all the trouble of buying it and then put near zero effort into testing it?
to the point of literally not even trying to track how many people are using SMI? wtf
Nobody has a problem with criticism, it's your adversarial, grating personality that people can't stand.There's a reason you don't have any friends, you should think about that. Everybody knows the standard treatments work. This is the new research section where we look for things that could be added to those to make them work better. Not everyone is capable of getting regrowth on the standard treatments alone, I don't know why that's so hard to understand. I had a lot of success adding additional treatments to my regimen, more than when using only the standard treatments. You're not smarter than anyone else because the big 3 work for you. You're just lucky that your hair loss isn't as severe as others and/or resistant to treatment. You've never presented any new research here that we can learn from, all you do is present information that everyone already knows. I think you're in the wrong section of the forum. You're not here to offer insight and constructive criticism, you're only here to be toxic and condescending. Just go away, nothing you say is valuable and no one likes you here or in the real worldit's not "lazy" to avoid using something you don't think works
it's not "leeching" to need better evidence of something
taking an unnecessary "risk" has no virtue
that you view pretty soft criticism in a research thread as some kind of a threat worth neutralizing is kind of sad
nobody is stopping you from trying SMI, eat as much as you want
it's not "lazy" to avoid using something you don't think works
it's not "leeching" to need better evidence of something
taking an unnecessary "risk" has no virtue
that you view pretty soft criticism in a research thread as some kind of a threat worth neutralizing is kind of sad
nobody is stopping you from trying SMI, eat as much as you want
Hopefully you’re a good responder. Most are. My own example - balding at 19, finasteride around 21, still have a good head of hair 14 years later. It’s hard to know if or by how much my hair situation has deteriorated since - obviously not doing too bad. Really hope results continue and hold until something else comes along as I don’t fancy going down the research chemical route.You think oral finasteride is enough for preservation in the meantime?