My Challenge To Bryan

[HT55]

Hey i never knew about internet archive, you could have just said why don't you try this and left the insults out.



Ok here are Bryans results after 2 years on prox n

[attachment=1:2avct1tm]beforepgbryan02.jpg[/attachment:2avct1tm]

[attachment=0:2avct1tm]pgbryan03.jpg[/attachment:2avct1tm]

 

[Jacob]

Yeah that brings back memories..and why I said nothing can be proven from them. I remember way back then asking for clearer pictures..and more of 'em. I'm not a fan of pictures...but.......

It's like those on his website: http://drproctor.com/
What's the point :dunno:
All these years and nothing else?

 

[Jacob]

And it's still there:

It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent

No evidence for that whatsoever.

http://www.drproctor.com/hair-regrowth-products.htm

 

[HT55]

Yeah that brings back memories..and why I said nothing can be proven from them. I remember way back then asking for clearer pictures..and more of 'em. I'm not a fan of pictures...but.......

It's like those on his website: http://drproctor.com/
What's the point :dunno:
All these years and nothing else?

I have no idea how anyone could look at those photos and say "good results" like the moderator did. There is no proof he would have balded further in those 2 years without the product.

Maybe Bryan can take a photo today (14 years later) and show us how much his balding has progressed since he stopped Prox n. Anyone want to bet on that happening, lol

 

[Jacob]

Well when you first look at them it looks good. But look at the "pattern" of hair/the wisps of hair.. in the front and back part of the bald areas. you can still see those there in the "after" pic. Possibly some minor filling in around that whole bald/circle area..but it's hard to tell because of the quality.

I hate pictures..mainly because of pictures like this. But what gets me is the claims being made...gives me a right to say something about 'em!

 

[Nene]

I also find Bryan's love of Dr. Proctor's products strange.

Why do you find it strange?

I find it strange b/c you're very knowledgeable and you seem to rely heavily on studies. You are very quick to discount Dr. Lee's products due to lack of studies, yet you said Proxn is better than rogaine which I think is preposterous. Not to say Proxn doesn't work, if you say it helped you, I'll take you at your word. That being said, I've never heard of any studies saying it works as well as minoxidil and I'm surprised you'd be so quick to make such a bold statement based on your own anecdotal evidence when you rely heavily on science normally.

 

[HT55]

Well when you first look at them it looks good.

I guess what I consider good is different as I don't see anything good about those results and I'm not ready to buy into the whole he didn't bald any further argument as for all we know his bald spot still looks the same today as it did 14 years ago ( when those pics were taken) as many people don't progress beyond a certain point of balding


Now you would expect someone with a bald spot that big to be much balder 14 years later, maybe Bryan can post a current photo as it may give a little bit of credibility to his "I didn't bald any further argument" if he is a Norwood 6 or 7 today.

 

[HT55]

Not to say Proxn doesn't work, if you say it helped you, I'll take you at your word.

No need to take him at his word, with a little help from our "very polite" moderator I was able to find Bryans photos

[attachment=1:25dgqid2]beforepgbryan02.jpg[/attachment:25dgqid2]


[attachment=0:25dgqid2]pgbryan03.jpg[/attachment:25dgqid2]

 

[Nene]

I do see an improvement but it's minimal. Certainly not enough to be able to say Proxn works better than rogaine, if that's your only evidence.

 

[Bryan]

It's like those on his website: http://drproctor.com/
What's the point :dunno:

What's the point? WHAT'S THE POINT??!!

The point is that those three before-and-after pics of the guy using Proxiphen are possibly the most astonishing we've ever seen.

 

[Bryan]

And it's still there:

It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent

No evidence for that whatsoever.

As I've told you before, I agree that he goes a bit too far that time (even though it _may_ be true).

 

[Bryan]

I also find Bryan's love of Dr. Proctor's products strange.

Why do you find it strange?

I find it strange b/c you're very knowledgeable and you seem to rely heavily on studies.

I rely on studies when I can, but there are no studies for Proxiphen or Prox-N. I have to go by the good results I got from 2 years of Prox-N usage, and the fact that (as I've said many times) I trust Dr. Proctor, and have no reason to doubt his honesty or medical judgement.

You are very quick to discount Dr. Lee's products due to lack of studies...

I've really only discounted just ONE of Dr. Lee's claims, and that's the one where he says that azelaic acid works as a topical 5a-reductase inhibitor. I've seen a claim in the medical literature which contradicts that, and I've seen other studies from the use of topical azelaic acid in humans which discount it, too. I think the fact that Dr. Lee refused to face me in a serious debate on another Web site on the accuracy of his claim speaks volumes about him.

Other than that one very dubious issue, I've actually spoken rather highly of his products on occasion. Just recently in another thread, I recommended to someone who was having problems with irritation from topical minoxidil that he try Dr. Lee's version which is free of propylene glycol.

...yet you said Proxn is better than rogaine which I think is preposterous.

I don't recall saying anything about that recently on this site, although I do think it's probably true. Rogaine may possibly be better in the short-term, but I'm pretty sure that Prox-N is better in the long-term. I have no idea at all why you think that's "preposterous".

Not to say Proxn doesn't work, if you say it helped you, I'll take you at your word. That being said, I've never heard of any studies saying it works as well as minoxidil and I'm surprised you'd be so quick to make such a bold statement based on your own anecdotal evidence when you rely heavily on science normally.

I think Dr. Proctor would probably agree with what I said, and he's looked at the results of a LOT more people using these products (Rogaine, Prox-N, and Proxiphen) than you or I.

 

[follicle84]

After seeing those pics i wouldn't call proxiphen a waste. Maybe over hyped but not a waste. The fact there was even regrowth although minimal is impressive. It goes to show there's products out there outside the fda that may work for some people.

I think what Bryan is getting at is that proxiphen is better for maintaining than minoxidil which doesnt maintain but improve the appearance of hair (thickening it up) without dealing with the cause of the hairloss. These results will diminish if the balding process continues. By all means im fan of minoxidil and can testify its results of improving the condition of hairloss are very impressive more so than even finasteride in the short term. However without the use of another agent to deal with the cause of the hairloss it is at best a delayed topik.

 

[Obsidian]

I've always wanted tot see bryan's pictures. It proves to me, and in my experience that while proctor's products are not a cure, in my experience, they work good in a well rounded regimen.

Speaking of which, does anyone know where you can authentic dr. Proctor's prox-n and nano shampoo without directly from his website?

 

[Jacob]

It's like those on his website: http://drproctor.com/
What's the point :dunno:

What's the point? WHAT'S THE POINT??!!

The point is that those three before-and-after pics of the guy using Proxiphen are possibly the most astonishing we've ever seen.

No, they are not. They are a very terrible example of before/after pictures. Very poor quality. The hair longer in each picture. PATHETIC. Especially after all these years.

Anyone else care to say they're the most astonishing we've ever seen? :woot:

I've been called a shill(as have others) in the past just for posting about certain things. You get away with this crap year after year after year. Defending this product and Dr. P while questioning nearly everything else.

 

[Jacob]

And it's still there:

It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent

No evidence for that whatsoever.

As I've told you before, I agree that he goes a bit too far that time (even though it _may_ be true).

It is completely made up. It is more than "a bit too far". He is claiming his product is better than anything else out there.

Way back I emailed him on this and he was pretty nasty in his responses. Very unprofessional. He's been questioned on this and yet he leaves it up on his website. For years and years and years. "I trust Dr. Proctor, and have no reason to doubt his honesty or medical judgement." Funny.

 

[Jacob]

Because of the quality of the pics, it's impossible to say for sure. I can't even see individual strands of hair in a lot of it. The pictures are also not from the same distance- notice the hands etc..although again..hard to tell with the shadows. See my previous posts on those wisps of hair you can compare.

The website ones though are :shakehead:

 

[HT55]

After seeing those pics i wouldn't call proxiphen a waste. Maybe over hyped but not a waste. The fact there was even regrowth although minimal is impressive. It goes to show there's products out there outside the fda that may work for some people.

I think what Bryan is getting at is that proxiphen is better for maintaining than minoxidil which doesnt maintain but improve the appearance of hair (thickening it up) without dealing with the cause of the hairloss. These results will diminish if the balding process continues. By all means im fan of minoxidil and can testify its results of improving the condition of hairloss are very impressive more so than even finasteride in the short term. However without the use of another agent to deal with the cause of the hairloss it is at best a delayed topik.

Why don't you drop the Rogaine and replace it with Prox n and see what happens if you think Prox n is better at manintaining hair ?

Show me anything that says prox n is better than minoxidil long term, ANYTHING except Bryan or proctor saying so

 

[HT55]

Is it better than Minoxidil or Finasteride? No. Is it a good option for people that cannot tolerate Finasteride or Minoxidil ? Yes.
It's definitely not superior, but it's better than nothing.

I colored the bald spot red up to the edges of the hairline, it highlights the bald spot, you can see the difference...

And if Bryan said it was not as good I would be fine with it he still says it's better.

Don't forget it also cost about 3 times as much as Rogaine FOAM at $30 a bottle plus shipping

BTW you didn't cover up his bald spot entirely in red in the 2nd photo, if you did you wouls see the spot shrank VERY little.

On another note how do we even know FOR SURE which is the before and after photo ?

 

[HT55]

I don't recall saying anything about that recently on this site, although I do think it's probably true. Rogaine may possibly be better in the short-term, but I'm pretty sure that Prox-N is better in the long-term. I have no idea at all why you think that's "preposterous".

I love how you are backing off your statements , Now Prox n is "probably better" but of course you have no way to know for sure now do you ?

So how about posting a pic, you must be Norwood 6/7 today right