What did he lied ? 5 years regrowth ?
Italian Hair Loss Lotion To Hit The Market In 2016
- Thread starter paleocapa89
- Start date
What did he lied ? 5 years regrowth ?
Your heart's in the right place here, but logically what you've said doesn't really follow.
Consider that you say that Brotzu likely lied or at least stretched the truth of his work...well, FIDIA's product is literally a commercialization of his work.
If the inventor's own presentation fails to show any efficacy for Androgenetic Alopecia, it's makes no sense to assume that the company has somehow found a way to make it work; the theoretical basis has to be solid and demonstrated beforehand.
This company stands to lose nothing, and that's what a lot of these fanboys don't seem to realize. This isn't a huge investment that is going to cost them millions of dollars and years in FDA-type trials and the number of people who'll buy it "just to see" when it comes out will probably be enough to make a small profit regardless, and they'll suffer no consequences even if it doesn't maintain and regrow hair.
- Reaction score
- 359
Man i work in the industry, you seem to have no idea of costs to produce products, do you realise to complete laboratory quality testing can cost thousands of dollars for 1 test for 1 batch and there could be up to 20 tests per batch. You are knowledgeable guy on alot of things but you dont have an idea about what investment fidia has done. QC testing is just 1 part of producing a product btw.
- Reaction score
- 216
"This isn't a huge investment" it's all fun and games right? Delusional
You are cherry picking 'evidence' so it brings some credibility to what you hope, will be reality.
A question for you. How much does it cost to create trials for a scam and release scam products? We've seen plenty of scammy shampoos with their "trials" that looked even better than this + this is a cosmetic product with cosmetic trials instead of scientific.
- Reaction score
- 359
Im simply saying its not fair to say fidia have no risk as they have invested nothing, none of us can possibly say that, nobody knows what they have invested so you cant call it a scam because fidia have nothing to lose.
- Reaction score
- 359
Call it a scam afte r6 months of its release if it does nothing, i understand peoples negative outlook and i too am cautious.
Let's investigate the ridiculous price tag and why it is such:
100 Euros per a single 30 ml bottle.
Assuming you buy 2 bottles per month, 200.
200 Eur x 24 months equals 4800 Euros which is the price of a 5-10 year old car in the car market.
Hair systems (around 450 euros every 6 months) equal 1800 Euros per 24 months.
A single bottle of Rogaine costs 23 Euros in Europe.
30 pills of Finasteride cost 5 Euros where I live. True it is not Propecia, but it is the same sh*t.
Cheapest brand of Minoxidil costs 7. 6 Euros per bottle on Ebay and I use it while getting actual results on crown and side effects on my monkey beard and blood pressure.
Why it is ridiculous?
TRINOV's price range suggests that it must be a competitor to HAIR SYSTEMS and not finasteride, minoxidil or even transplants.
Why you should be concerned and why evidence for justification is essential?
If this does absolutely NOTHING, you'd be better off if you bought a hair system or a transplant. The cost will be around the same, even cheaper if you choose a hair system. True, when it comes to a transplant it could be a hit or miss and you'll need more extra money. But both of them actually work as flawed, but actual solutions.
If TRINOV wants to save its name, just maintenance pics are noth enough, you need to show substantial regrowth when you are competing with hair systems.
100 Euros per a single 30 ml bottle.
Assuming you buy 2 bottles per month, 200.
200 Eur x 24 months equals 4800 Euros which is the price of a 5-10 year old car in the car market.
Hair systems (around 450 euros every 6 months) equal 1800 Euros per 24 months.
A single bottle of Rogaine costs 23 Euros in Europe.
30 pills of Finasteride cost 5 Euros where I live. True it is not Propecia, but it is the same sh*t.
Cheapest brand of Minoxidil costs 7. 6 Euros per bottle on Ebay and I use it while getting actual results on crown and side effects on my monkey beard and blood pressure.
Why it is ridiculous?
TRINOV's price range suggests that it must be a competitor to HAIR SYSTEMS and not finasteride, minoxidil or even transplants.
Why you should be concerned and why evidence for justification is essential?
If this does absolutely NOTHING, you'd be better off if you bought a hair system or a transplant. The cost will be around the same, even cheaper if you choose a hair system. True, when it comes to a transplant it could be a hit or miss and you'll need more extra money. But both of them actually work as flawed, but actual solutions.
If TRINOV wants to save its name, just maintenance pics are noth enough, you need to show substantial regrowth when you are competing with hair systems.
We have the impatient email/phone stalkers to (partially) thank for the high price.
Whilst you have a point you cant really draw a line between a treatment (regardless of price) and hair systems. As the value you can put on someones desire to avoid a hair system could be enormous. I'd rather pay thousands and thousands over a lifetime to maintain just to avoid a hair system.
- Reaction score
- 540
Plus if it didn't work, no-one is going to keep laying down 70-140 Euros a month for 2 years?
Its something to try.....their pics and studies will paint the picture...positively or negatively.
Group 1: 10 (6 male, 4 female) patients treated for 120 days with 1 ml/day of Lotion A to be applied on a well defined area of the scalp;
On day 7 : both group 1 and group 2 experience a reduction of hair loss, defined "substantial" by patients of group 1 and "modest" by those of group 2. Group 3 feels hair as more robust. Groups 4 and 5 do not report any variation;
On day 20: in group 1 all the patients have stopped losing hair and report the presence of a substantial fuzz. In group 2 hair loss has stopped in 6 patients and fuzz, where present, is more modest (in terms of number/cm [SUP]2 [/SUP]) . Group 3 reports an aesthetic improvement related to hair brightness. Group 4 reports a minimal reduction in hair loss. Group 5 does not report any variation;
On day 45: in group 1, fuzz has grown markedly stronger and takes the colour and consistency of natural hair. In group 2, as expected, all the patients have stopped losing hair, but only some of them report a certain degree of regrowth, fuzz is very weak and not completely coloured yet. Group 3 reports disappearance of split ends. Group 4 reports arrested hair loss in all the subjects and, in some of them, presence of weak fuzz. Group 5 does not report any variation;
On day 90: in group 1 all the patients report total disappearance of hair reduction areas that have been replaced by robust and shiny hair. In group 2 hair reduction is still visible, even if areas are all covered with thick fuzz. Group 3 confirms a general hair improvement. Groups 4 and 5 do not record variations from the previous evaluation;
On day 120: group 1 confirms results already seen at day 90. Group 2 continues improvement, even if in some patients of male gender the fuzz has not got the characteristics of strength and colour typical of hair yet. Group 3 confirms results previously obtained. Groups 4 and 5 do not record variations from the previous evaluation .
was this all bullshit or
On day 7 : both group 1 and group 2 experience a reduction of hair loss, defined "substantial" by patients of group 1 and "modest" by those of group 2. Group 3 feels hair as more robust. Groups 4 and 5 do not report any variation;
On day 20: in group 1 all the patients have stopped losing hair and report the presence of a substantial fuzz. In group 2 hair loss has stopped in 6 patients and fuzz, where present, is more modest (in terms of number/cm [SUP]2 [/SUP]) . Group 3 reports an aesthetic improvement related to hair brightness. Group 4 reports a minimal reduction in hair loss. Group 5 does not report any variation;
On day 45: in group 1, fuzz has grown markedly stronger and takes the colour and consistency of natural hair. In group 2, as expected, all the patients have stopped losing hair, but only some of them report a certain degree of regrowth, fuzz is very weak and not completely coloured yet. Group 3 reports disappearance of split ends. Group 4 reports arrested hair loss in all the subjects and, in some of them, presence of weak fuzz. Group 5 does not report any variation;
On day 90: in group 1 all the patients report total disappearance of hair reduction areas that have been replaced by robust and shiny hair. In group 2 hair reduction is still visible, even if areas are all covered with thick fuzz. Group 3 confirms a general hair improvement. Groups 4 and 5 do not record variations from the previous evaluation;
On day 120: group 1 confirms results already seen at day 90. Group 2 continues improvement, even if in some patients of male gender the fuzz has not got the characteristics of strength and colour typical of hair yet. Group 3 confirms results previously obtained. Groups 4 and 5 do not record variations from the previous evaluation .
was this all bullshit or
These were non-professional studies Brotzu did in his basement.
Holy F I forgot how bad this was.
- After 7 days hair feels 'more robust'...
- After 6 weeks 'split ends disappear'? It is also a conditioner now? How the f*** does a topical that is meant to absorb through the scalp do ANYTHING for split ENDS.
Actually, there is a lot people in this forum who believe in stuff like that. "Took 2g of seti yesterday, my hair looks healthier"
Haha it was just the other day when I literally read some guy saying that his hair looked thicker on days he did not masturbate, I am not kidding.
- Reaction score
- 44
- Reaction score
- 980
And the trichograms confirm it?
- Reaction score
- 479
There's a pretty simple reason why all the people that were huge advocates of this at the start of the thread are now saying it's nothing. The ones who did all the research trying to prove and convince the 'haters' why it was legit.
The problem was, once they did enough research on it, they came to the clear conclusion that it will do nothing.
The problem was, once they did enough research on it, they came to the clear conclusion that it will do nothing.