- Reaction score
- 421
I don't think this is necesarily bad, if she is a completely bald woman, in her 40s and with her hair long time gone, modest results seem encouraging
Italian Hair Loss Lotion To Hit The Market In 2016
- Thread starter paleocapa89
- Start date
hanginginthewire
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 1,427
Hype train! Choo choo! Choo chooophfduuhscaadgbvdhjvfhuljefyjvrhitteeeryyvqghhbdfgjkcseyytrewfjjgvdwtyukldfgghxxhxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxccccxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I don't even know why they are so happy to talk there. Did I miss something?? As far as I know Areata is already cured? They just have to wait for commercialization??? Why the hell there are so many Areata people still crying?
Anyway... I don't care about this Areata stuff and they obviously don't care about Androgenetic Alopecia. FIDIA bring it out!!! They act like they were holding a Royal Flush in their hands. Silent mode in poker could mean Royal Flush or Bluffing
Anyway... I don't care about this Areata stuff and they obviously don't care about Androgenetic Alopecia. FIDIA bring it out!!! They act like they were holding a Royal Flush in their hands. Silent mode in poker could mean Royal Flush or Bluffing
MrJolly16
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 602
They just talked about their own experience, but I think that in a way this is good for us. Ok, the lotion didn´t help Jole, but what a big company like Fidia is looking for is to sell the lotion to a huge amount of people, so I believe they have been working to face the Androgenetic Alopecia.
- Reaction score
- 421
Was she pissed off about her results?
- Reaction score
- 1,709
See this is exactly what I find irritating about this thread.
The woman, THAT we all know about and consider a key player, said on NATIONAL TV that the lotion was minimally effective.
What kind of person, before the broadcast, sees a completely bald woman and expects otherwise?
What kind of person, after the broadcast, then starts discussing the relative minutia of universalis vs areata vs androgenetic, in order to hold hopes for the lotion? Of couse they are all different - what justification does anyone here have to expect better performance with Androgenetic Alopecia than AA? What ingredients in the lotion have you completely convinced that it will definitely address Androgenetic Alopecia (WHICH, may I remind you, we do NOT have picture evidence or data for)?
If a panel of women part of an organization involved in all types of alopecia have a very modest opinion of the lotion, what kind of person misinterprets this situation by suggesting that well, "X and Y haven't been revealed yet so we will just have to see."
This is not simply my opinion. This is just rationality speaking. This lotion has been entombed by brick after brick of disappointment.
Was it worthwhile to investigate this cure? Yes, absolutely! Do I blame the doctor? No of course not. Good on him for trying.
BUT I think it is past time that we gather the evidence and greatly lower our expectations for this lotion or even assume that it does not work; the worst that will happen is that we will be pleasantly surprised, but the chances of that happening have been slipping away for quite a while now.
And before you scapegoat me for being the bearer of bad news, step back and assess the situation for a moment. If I offered to sell you the lotion for $300/mo, what questions would you need answered, what assurances would you need to be given, in order to feel that you have not made a mistake with a moot product? What would you consider unacceptable or bad signs?Because that's what we should be looking for now, in spite of the fact that some of us are clearly blinded by the hope that the lotion "will definitely" work. Waiting for the lotion is comprable to waiting for the baldness to go away - they both ignore the reality that is presented every day.
This lotion is markedly different than the concept of Follica or Shiseido or Riken in that the major component of technology is fixed - either dgla+equol+carnitine works, or it doesn't. In fact, if you recall the patent, it claims that ONLY dgla+equol TOGETHER works. Ok. Suppose that this lotion delivers only modest improvements for Androgenetic Alopecia. What's the next step? Short of changing the dosage, there is no backup plan.
If things go bad, Shiseido can consider culturing different kinds of cells. In fact this was part of the RCH research.
Riken can use alternative media, culturing techniques, and types of cells.
Follica can change the applied compound(s) to change effectiveness.
These other companies have paths forward yet, so to me it is acceptable for them to claim that they are still im development.
If Fidia's main task is to improve stability, then I assume that the efficacy is still the same as always. Even if we assume that Fidia doubled the efficacy, which would be quite an accomplishment, we would still need to see half-baked results with the lotion, which we have not.
The woman, THAT we all know about and consider a key player, said on NATIONAL TV that the lotion was minimally effective.
What kind of person, before the broadcast, sees a completely bald woman and expects otherwise?
What kind of person, after the broadcast, then starts discussing the relative minutia of universalis vs areata vs androgenetic, in order to hold hopes for the lotion? Of couse they are all different - what justification does anyone here have to expect better performance with Androgenetic Alopecia than AA? What ingredients in the lotion have you completely convinced that it will definitely address Androgenetic Alopecia (WHICH, may I remind you, we do NOT have picture evidence or data for)?
If a panel of women part of an organization involved in all types of alopecia have a very modest opinion of the lotion, what kind of person misinterprets this situation by suggesting that well, "X and Y haven't been revealed yet so we will just have to see."
This is not simply my opinion. This is just rationality speaking. This lotion has been entombed by brick after brick of disappointment.
Was it worthwhile to investigate this cure? Yes, absolutely! Do I blame the doctor? No of course not. Good on him for trying.
BUT I think it is past time that we gather the evidence and greatly lower our expectations for this lotion or even assume that it does not work; the worst that will happen is that we will be pleasantly surprised, but the chances of that happening have been slipping away for quite a while now.
And before you scapegoat me for being the bearer of bad news, step back and assess the situation for a moment. If I offered to sell you the lotion for $300/mo, what questions would you need answered, what assurances would you need to be given, in order to feel that you have not made a mistake with a moot product? What would you consider unacceptable or bad signs?Because that's what we should be looking for now, in spite of the fact that some of us are clearly blinded by the hope that the lotion "will definitely" work. Waiting for the lotion is comprable to waiting for the baldness to go away - they both ignore the reality that is presented every day.
This lotion is markedly different than the concept of Follica or Shiseido or Riken in that the major component of technology is fixed - either dgla+equol+carnitine works, or it doesn't. In fact, if you recall the patent, it claims that ONLY dgla+equol TOGETHER works. Ok. Suppose that this lotion delivers only modest improvements for Androgenetic Alopecia. What's the next step? Short of changing the dosage, there is no backup plan.
If things go bad, Shiseido can consider culturing different kinds of cells. In fact this was part of the RCH research.
Riken can use alternative media, culturing techniques, and types of cells.
Follica can change the applied compound(s) to change effectiveness.
These other companies have paths forward yet, so to me it is acceptable for them to claim that they are still im development.
If Fidia's main task is to improve stability, then I assume that the efficacy is still the same as always. Even if we assume that Fidia doubled the efficacy, which would be quite an accomplishment, we would still need to see half-baked results with the lotion, which we have not.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 421
Well the ones that made the lotion did already said that it worked better for androgenic that for areata. We weren`t expecting her to say how it worked for her because we did know that her case was fuckin loosed (she was like a cue ball appearly), we though she may give some new information, which she didn't. Let met tell you that if the lotion doesn't work I do f*****g blame the doctor, because that would be straight up lying, he made pretty big promises, he is the one that hyped things up and we believe in him because his approach could work and because he is a very respected figure. Fidia is the one that has been quietly testing things.
I partially agree with your message but... you are totally overestimating the important of her speech. This wasn't on national TV, it was a minor panel that 50 people were watching on YouTube and its goal was to create awareness for AA. Brotzu was literally mentioned for 2 seconds. Also she has Alopecia Universalis which is by far the worst type of AA. Also she was getting emotional, otherwise why would she say 2 days ago on the newspapaer that she was seeing (maybe not on her?) very good results with the lotion?
Really, this conference had 0 useful news for both Fidia and Androgenetic Alopecia, so don't imagine things.
- Reaction score
- 5
So that means that trials have ended that why she speaks about the lotion that's a good sight for me. Also im 100% they will include hyaluronic acid on fidia's minoxidil over 9000 xD
br1
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 2,161
So this lotion is total crap.. Dosent work. Woman is bald
Yes, as expected, but keep watching ppl here will still think "but Fidia has a working lotion, uhh"..
No, they don't. Never gonna hear a thing about this again from FIDIA or any other professor clown.
"Lotion", lol
br1
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 2,161
lol
- Reaction score
- 421
Someone making f*****g sense
- Reaction score
- 1,709
You suggest that the level of publicity that this meeting got somehow affects conclusions drawn about the lotion, but it does not. It changes little about what I said.
Telling me not to imagine things - unbelievable.
Here is the take home message, folks. If you have learned anything, ANYTHNG at all from this forum, or any other forum, or from the hairloss world in general, it is the following:
DO NOT assume something works until proven so.
Or, phrased slightly differently,
ASSUME things DON'T work until proven otherwise.
Many here are stubbornly clinging to the reverse viewpoint.
Do you see the difference? I'm not saying that the lotion definitely does NOT work, and that I have proof of that. No. I am saying there isn't any high quality evidence to suggest otherwise.
What I am NOT doing is imagining a secret version of the lotion in an unknown place with high efficacy.
Last edited:
Honestly don't care what she has to say. She has Areata so obviously all her hair is gone. If she says the lotion didn't do much doesn't effect us we don't have the same disease. Considering they were talking about how Fidia cancelled the trial for the Areata group and keor pursuing Androgenetic Alopecia instead. Possibly because of this, the lotion had minimal effect on Areata patients so I could care less they arleasy have JAKs coming. And this was brotzus formulation not fidias once again. Fidia is trailing Androgenetic Alopecia still so the hype train is still in cause that's what we are all here for so don't get so butt hurt that it didn't work for a different disease lol