Thank you for your not backed up on anything opinion. The fact that this subforum is about natural treatments doesn't mean you should come here and make random claims with no scientific studies behind them. Cause if that was the case I could say for example that in the zix thread (and I read it all) there is waaaay more people on whom zix had a neutral or even negative effect than a positive one lol
But that would just be anecdotal evidence, so I wouldn't go to that thread and tell them stop putting that goddamn zix on their scalp cause it ain't gonna work! Which is what you did here.
So... scientific backup on your claims or gtfo
As you can see, I am already a member here for a decade. I am also a member of two other international hair loss message boards, a dutch one, and a German one so I have literally hundreds of cases where people used one or more of the compounds you want to use and I have never ever seen a user saying that it yielded him good long term results. Sure they are all anecdotes but when you combine the two factors: lack of scientific backup + lack of efficacy from anecdotal repots... then that number 99% is starting to look pretty plausible.
Zix has some science behind it. Not much, I give you that, but still more than most of the things you post. Besides the main zix topic on here there are literally dozens of topics on the internet where people have results from zix. For literally each of all the things you post (except for the mushroom thing) I have already looked into their efficacy individually in my quest for a working alternative treatments. Whether it is anecdotes, mechanistic data, or whatever... It is all very very unconvincing.