First about me: I'm currently in the mid-20s and maybe about Norwood 1,5. Disclaimer: English is not my native language. I'm interested in things I can do to maintain what I have. I thought about Minoxidil, but it seems to not adress hair loss, just increase what you currently have and offset everything by maybe two years. As well, you'll need to take it forever and there are sides like increased wrinkles etc... that makes it just not worth it to me. Finasteride seems like the better option. I'm scared of the sides people on the forums are reporting. Yes I know the sides are reported only sparsely in studies, but thats always the question if peoples self-reported data is correct. Lots of these people probably don't want to admit to these kind of side-effects, don't exactly remember what it was like before etc... While animal studies suggest definite effects that are measurable.
So there are experimental treaments like RU, CB etc... RU seems to be really hard to get, I don't know where I could order it and also seems really expensive. CB has yet to get the right vehicle, then it would probably be the cure. So what I would like to do is maintain whatever I currently have until a decent treatment like CB is found, which may be in the next 1-2 years. I'm sure the community will find a working vehicle in that time.
Now, I looked at Nizoral since its probably better then nothing. I looked at some studies and start to think that its undervalued. I try to make the case for it now:
http://vipadenievolos.ru/files/research/ketokonazole/Ketoconazole_Shampoo_Study.pdf
I won't even talk about the second study, which showed it to increase hair density more so then Minoxidil, since the sample size is very low. But the first study basically showed that less hair were in the telogen phase and hair thickness is increased. As far as I know from my current research, hair loss works like this:
You start with thick hair. Hair gets thinner and out of the anagen phase into the telogen phase. In the telogen phase it continues to thin more and more, until at some point it can't even penetrate the skin anymore and isn't visible. If it remains in that stage long enough, its very hard to rescue. So if you can increase the thickness of the hair (if you look at the graph, it continues to thicken up basically for two years) wouldn't this mean that you keep the hair you currently have? Even if its in the telogen phase, if it does not get any thinner, it won't get "lost" and still penetrate the skin and at least will be maintained that way until you find a better cure?
That is pretty much how it seems to me, correct me if wrong. What is also interesting about this study: Most of the effects occured after 6 months, which as opposed to minoxidil suggests that it may be more about the DHT inhibiting effects that are similar to finasteride as opposed to a simple temporary growth stimulant. Also, in the group that did not suffer Androgenetic Alopecia, no difference occured with treatment, which would be expected as they don't suffer from DHT-related processes..
Now, another study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18498517
Hair shaft diameter was increased, shedding decreased, anagen phase increased... Increased hair shaft diameter = no further miniaturization (or loss of hair), is that correct? If not, why?
Just to mention the japanese study:
http://www.pharmacymix.com/docs/nizoral_shampoo_ketoconazole_2_hair_loss.pdf
I'm not even that interested in their results, since their sample size was low. If they did not lie, it seems impressive. But what I found interesting was this comment:
And now combine this knowledge with
I know the first two studies are by people that work with Nizoral, or am I wrong about that? Still, this does not mean that necessarily their data is wrong. There is also this study from other authors:
http://www.dermatol.or.jp/Journal/JD/full/029080489e.pdf
Showing finasteride and nizoral together to be better for Hair growth (but for hair fall only after 6 months) compared to finasteride only. If the effect is truly because of the antiandrogenic factors associated with nizoral, I would not even suspect a huge difference between finasteride only and both combined, since in most studies finasteride alone is already enough to completely stop Androgenetic Alopecia and even regrow some hair, you can't improve on an already "perfect" result. Too bad they did not test nizoral only, but the hair growth seems to suggest nizoral to have a nice effect.
To me it seems that by looking at the data, hair loss could be halted in people that don't have very agressive Androgenetic Alopecia at least for a few years. The only issue I have is that in a lot of these studies the scientists work for McNeil. But there are apparently also other studies (the japanese one, the last one I posted etc...). Also there are even more studies by the same authors, but at least all seem to get the same conclusion, increasing hair shaft diameter. I only wonder why hair density was not increased in one of their studies, yet it was in a different one. But after 6 months, usually finasteride also does not necessarily increase hair density (number of hairs).
Any input?
So there are experimental treaments like RU, CB etc... RU seems to be really hard to get, I don't know where I could order it and also seems really expensive. CB has yet to get the right vehicle, then it would probably be the cure. So what I would like to do is maintain whatever I currently have until a decent treatment like CB is found, which may be in the next 1-2 years. I'm sure the community will find a working vehicle in that time.
Now, I looked at Nizoral since its probably better then nothing. I looked at some studies and start to think that its undervalued. I try to make the case for it now:
http://vipadenievolos.ru/files/research/ketokonazole/Ketoconazole_Shampoo_Study.pdf
I won't even talk about the second study, which showed it to increase hair density more so then Minoxidil, since the sample size is very low. But the first study basically showed that less hair were in the telogen phase and hair thickness is increased. As far as I know from my current research, hair loss works like this:
You start with thick hair. Hair gets thinner and out of the anagen phase into the telogen phase. In the telogen phase it continues to thin more and more, until at some point it can't even penetrate the skin anymore and isn't visible. If it remains in that stage long enough, its very hard to rescue. So if you can increase the thickness of the hair (if you look at the graph, it continues to thicken up basically for two years) wouldn't this mean that you keep the hair you currently have? Even if its in the telogen phase, if it does not get any thinner, it won't get "lost" and still penetrate the skin and at least will be maintained that way until you find a better cure?
That is pretty much how it seems to me, correct me if wrong. What is also interesting about this study: Most of the effects occured after 6 months, which as opposed to minoxidil suggests that it may be more about the DHT inhibiting effects that are similar to finasteride as opposed to a simple temporary growth stimulant. Also, in the group that did not suffer Androgenetic Alopecia, no difference occured with treatment, which would be expected as they don't suffer from DHT-related processes..
Now, another study:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18498517
Hair shaft diameter was increased, shedding decreased, anagen phase increased... Increased hair shaft diameter = no further miniaturization (or loss of hair), is that correct? If not, why?
Just to mention the japanese study:
http://www.pharmacymix.com/docs/nizoral_shampoo_ketoconazole_2_hair_loss.pdf
I'm not even that interested in their results, since their sample size was low. If they did not lie, it seems impressive. But what I found interesting was this comment:
And now combine this knowledge with
I know the first two studies are by people that work with Nizoral, or am I wrong about that? Still, this does not mean that necessarily their data is wrong. There is also this study from other authors:
http://www.dermatol.or.jp/Journal/JD/full/029080489e.pdf
Showing finasteride and nizoral together to be better for Hair growth (but for hair fall only after 6 months) compared to finasteride only. If the effect is truly because of the antiandrogenic factors associated with nizoral, I would not even suspect a huge difference between finasteride only and both combined, since in most studies finasteride alone is already enough to completely stop Androgenetic Alopecia and even regrow some hair, you can't improve on an already "perfect" result. Too bad they did not test nizoral only, but the hair growth seems to suggest nizoral to have a nice effect.
To me it seems that by looking at the data, hair loss could be halted in people that don't have very agressive Androgenetic Alopecia at least for a few years. The only issue I have is that in a lot of these studies the scientists work for McNeil. But there are apparently also other studies (the japanese one, the last one I posted etc...). Also there are even more studies by the same authors, but at least all seem to get the same conclusion, increasing hair shaft diameter. I only wonder why hair density was not increased in one of their studies, yet it was in a different one. But after 6 months, usually finasteride also does not necessarily increase hair density (number of hairs).
Any input?
