RE PROXIPHEN AND PROMOX

[hairhoper]

Ignore hairhoper. He's made it clear to us that he shoots his mouth off about things he knows nothing about.

If you want honest advice, listen to what I tell you.

Haha.

What I know ... is a hypocrite when I see one. You demand proof for every treatment, citing studies all over the place, yet COMPLETELY drop this attitude when it comes to Proctor's products, which just get a free pass.

The second a topic crops up where you get a chance to talk about Proctor's stuff, you're instantly recommending people use a product you don't have a shred of evidence to backup, a product which is not even open about its ingredients and makes ludicrous claims of efficacy on its website.

The more we see this behaviour of yours, the clear leap from 'logical learned skeptic Bryan' to 'just use Proctor's stuff, he's a Doctor so he must be right Bryan' the more and more painfully obvious it becomes you have an agenda.

 

[Bryan]

What I know ... is a hypocrite when I see one. You demand proof for every treatment, citing studies all over the place, yet COMPLETELY drop this attitude when it comes to Proctor's products, which just get a free pass.

I DON'T always demand proof for every treatment, you moron, which you'd know if you actually bothered to read my posts. I do ask for proof occasionally, when it's appropriate, and when it's required. I haven't done that for Dr. Proctor's products, because of my own experience, and that of many others who have raved about them. Do you want me to post that list of rave reviews for him again that I've posted in the past? :laugh:

I do cite a lot of studies, when it's appropriate. You ought to do the same.

The second a topic crops up where you get a chance to talk about Proctor's stuff, you're instantly recommending people use a product you don't have a shred of evidence to backup, a product which is not even open about its ingredients and makes ludicrous claims of efficacy on its website.

The more we see this behaviour of yours, the clear leap from 'logical learned skeptic Bryan' to 'just use Proctor's stuff, he's a Doctor so he must be right Bryan' the more and more painfully obvious it becomes you have an agenda.

Re-read what I just got through saying to you, pal.

 

[Jacob]

Re-read what hairhoper just got through saying to you, pal.

 

[majorsixth]

:spam:

 

[majorsixth]

Originally posted by Bryan

I do cite a lot of studies, when it's appropriate.

Well don't you believe it's most appropriate to cite some studies/evidence in the case of you promoting Dr Proctors product? I would like to see this evidence !

Here's an opportunity to post them and show everyone that your not full of shite!

 

[Bryan]

Well don't you believe it's most appropriate to cite some studies/evidence in the case of you promoting Dr Proctors product? I would like to see this evidence !

Here's an opportunity to post them and show everyone that your not full of shite!

Really? Exactly what kind of "studies/evidence" would you like to see? Something published in a medical journal? You're aware, I hope, that Proxiphen is something put out by a private physician that consists of numerous active ingredients, and not something that consists of a single patented drug, put out by a corporation (like minoxidil or finasteride)? What do you think is the likelihood of seeing "studies/evidence" for such a product like what Dr. Proctor puts out, compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?

I can understand your desire to see "studies/evidence" for something like this, but such things are not always easily available. Sometimes you have to make-do with just the science of such a product, the knowledge of the person who puts it out, the respect he has in his field, and the respect he has of the people who use it.

 

[Jacob]

What do you think is the likelihood of seeing "studies/evidence" for such a product like what Dr. Proctor puts out, compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?

Never. Not even in 26+ more years. Not even on the individual, "single patented substance(s)" Proctor has.

I can understand your desire to see "studies/evidence" for something like this, but such things are not always easily available.

And yet Dr. Proctor started out selling his crap by saying he had just that..."a comprehensive three year clinical study". Even now..he still has on his website: "It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent". W/out "studies/evidence"..it's another lie.

Sometimes you have to make-do with just the science of such a product, the knowledge of the person who puts it out, the respect he has in his field, and the respect he has of the people who use it.

Translation: It's crap, but maybe somebody actually believes what I'm saying.

 

[Bryan]

What do you think is the likelihood of seeing "studies/evidence" for such a product like what Dr. Proctor puts out, compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?

Never. Not even in 26+ more years. Not even on the individual, "single patented substance(s)" Proctor has.

So are you admitting that you're finally agreeing with me? That sometimes it's tough to get "studies/evidence"?

I can understand your desire to see "studies/evidence" for something like this, but such things are not always easily available.

And yet Dr. Proctor started out selling his crap by saying he had just that..."a comprehensive three year clinical study". Even now..he still has on his website: "It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent". W/out "studies/evidence"..it's another lie.

I guess it depends on what exactly he means by "a comprehensive three year clinical study". Maybe it's just a bunch of observations that he's conducted over that period of time, and found Proxiphen to be extremely useful. Rather than gnash your teeth over something like that, why not just call him up and ASK him what he meant by that "three year clinical study"? Why all these histrionics that you're so famous for?

And as for the "It grows significantly more hair..." comment that bothers you so much -- I've already told you that I agree with you on that! It goes a bit too far to say something like that. But why do I even bother saying it to you again? Never before have you ever paid any attention to what I tell you, so why do I start now? :dunno:

Sometimes you have to make-do with just the science of such a product, the knowledge of the person who puts it out, the respect he has in his field, and the respect he has of the people who use it.

Translation: It's crap, but maybe somebody actually believes what I'm saying.

Not me! _I_ certainly don't believe what you're saying. I believe what doctors and scientists say about medical technology, and let obnoxious big-mouths on the Internet talk about whatever else they want to talk about.

 

[Jacob]

What do you think is the likelihood of seeing "studies/evidence" for such a product like what Dr. Proctor puts out, compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?

Never. Not even in 26+ more years. Not even on the individual, "single patented substance(s)" Proctor has.

So are you admitting that you're finally agreeing with me? That sometimes it's tough to get "studies/evidence"?

You know..I used to think you were just playing dumb....
No..I am not agreeing with you. Why do you think I said "Not even on the individual, "single patented substance(s)" Proctor has." ? You had said: "compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?" As lame as an excuse it was for you to put Proctor's combination against Merck's etc "single patented substance"...anyone with a brain knows you can just take one of Proctor's "single patented substances" and do or ask for a study or for evidence.

I can understand your desire to see "studies/evidence" for something like this, but such things are not always easily available.

And yet Dr. Proctor started out selling his crap by saying he had just that..."a comprehensive three year clinical study". Even now..he still has on his website: "It grows significantly more hair on more people than any other agent". W/out "studies/evidence"..it's another lie.

I guess it depends on what exactly he means by "a comprehensive three year clinical study". Maybe it's just a bunch of observations that he's conducted over that period of time, and found Proxiphen to be extremely useful. Rather than gnash your teeth over something like that, why not just call him up and ASK him what he meant by that "three year clinical study"? Why all these histrionics that you're so famous for?

Only a shill would pretend "a comprehensive three year clinical study" could even be considered "just a bunch of observations that he's conducted over that period of time".

And as for the "It grows significantly more hair..." comment that bothers you so much -- I've already told you that I agree with you on that! It goes a bit too far to say something like that. But why do I even bother saying it to you again? Never before have you ever paid any attention to what I tell you, so why do I start now? :dunno:

And yet in chat(that same chat transcript) you basically said the same thing as Proctor. In these forums you constantly say it's the OBVIOUS thing to use..etc etc. Don't talk about Proctor going to far, when you yourself are guilty of that. For 15+ years.

Sometimes you have to make-do with just the science of such a product, the knowledge of the person who puts it out, the respect he has in his field, and the respect he has of the people who use it.

Translation: It's crap, but maybe somebody actually believes what I'm saying.

Not me! _I_ certainly don't believe what you're saying. I believe what doctors and scientists say about medical technology, and let obnoxious big-mouths on the Internet talk about whatever else they want to talk about.

As I said..I used to think you were just playing dumb. When I say "Translation;"..what comes after that is a mock translation of what you could just as well be saying. So it's you that is saying "It's crap, but maybe somebody actually believes what I'm saying." :shakehead:

This needs to be said again...

Bryan is a shill for Proctor and his products. He's been shill 'n spam'n the crap for 15+ years. There are plenty of doctors with hair loss products out there. With patents on their ingreds/products as well. In fact, one of those doctors..Dr. Lee..for all these years.. has been bashed and ridiculed and questioned by Bryan. Bryan wants us to just trust and believe Proctor because he's a Dr, but isn't consistent when it comes to other Drs and their products. There is no evidence for Proctor's/Bryan's claims or wishes. Not only has Proctor not said which specific cu peptides are used, but he and Bryan also talk about "mysterious ingredients" that are not in the ingreds list(s). Snake-oil talk that is supposed to get you even more excited about the products. The same goes for their- "better bang for the buck" talk regarding getting the non-prescription products from places outside of Proctor's website. They want you to believe those cheaper versions are lite/watered-down...are you really going to purchase a lite/watered-down version of a product for something so difficult to treat as male pattern baldness? Buy the "more potent" crap directly from Proctor and he makes a bit more money. And to top it all off...Bryan doesn't even use the products himself, and hasn't since he supposedly did so well on one of them probably 15 years ago! He's pushing crap he supposedly doesn't even use- so don't bother asking him for updated before/afters. For all the reasons above..he should have been laughed out of these forums years ago.

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=72201

 

[Bryan]

So are you admitting that you're finally agreeing with me? That sometimes it's tough to get "studies/evidence"?

You know..I used to think you were just playing dumb....
No..I am not agreeing with you. Why do you think I said "Not even on the individual, "single patented substance(s)" Proctor has." ? You had said: "compared to a single patented substance put out by Merck, Upjohn, Glaxo, etc.?" As lame as an excuse it was for you to put Proctor's combination against Merck's etc "single patented substance"...anyone with a brain knows you can just take one of Proctor's "single patented substances" and do or ask for a study or for evidence.

I think anybody would agree with me that it's a lot more difficult to "patent" a complex mixture of ingredients like Proxiphen, especially if not all of the ingredients are even known. Finasteride? Sure. Dutasteride? Sure. Rogaine? Sure. But Proxiphen, with it's hidden ingredients?? You gotta be shitting me! :laugh:

And as for the "It grows significantly more hair..." comment that bothers you so much -- I've already told you that I agree with you on that! It goes a bit too far to say something like that. But why do I even bother saying it to you again? Never before have you ever paid any attention to what I tell you, so why do I start now? :dunno:

And yet in chat(that same chat transcript) you basically said the same thing as Proctor.

Really? What exactly did I say?

In these forums you constantly say it's the OBVIOUS thing to use..etc etc.

It usually IS the obvious thing to use, dumbbell.

(snip a ton of garbage)

 

[Jacob]

Yep..it's official. Bryan thinks we're dumb..and yet look at him :shock:

Gotta love that snipping


Bryan is a shill for Proctor and his products. He's been shill 'n spam'n the crap for 15+ years. There are plenty of doctors with hair loss products out there. With patents on their ingreds/products as well. In fact, one of those doctors..Dr. Lee..for all these years.. has been bashed and ridiculed and questioned by Bryan. Bryan wants us to just trust and believe Proctor because he's a Dr, but isn't consistent when it comes to other Drs and their products. There is no evidence for Proctor's/Bryan's claims or wishes. Not only has Proctor not said which specific cu peptides are used, but he and Bryan also talk about "mysterious ingredients" that are not in the ingreds list(s). Snake-oil talk that is supposed to get you even more excited about the products. The same goes for their- "better bang for the buck" talk regarding getting the non-prescription products from places outside of Proctor's website. They want you to believe those cheaper versions are lite/watered-down...are you really going to purchase a lite/watered-down version of a product for something so difficult to treat as male pattern baldness? Buy the "more potent" crap directly from Proctor and he makes a bit more money. And to top it all off...Bryan doesn't even use the products himself, and hasn't since he supposedly did so well on one of them probably 15 years ago! He's pushing crap he supposedly doesn't even use- so don't bother asking him for updated before/afters. For all the reasons above..he should have been laughed out of these forums years ago.

http://www.hairlosstalk.com/interact/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=72201

 

[hairhoper]

The best possible case here is that Bryan is an honest guy who has blind faith in Proctor. Worst case (and the one that seems most likely) is that he's a blatant shill.

Even so if you're considering choosing a product on that basis that some old chap has blind faith in some croney quack who can't offer a shred of proof, you need to rethink

 

[Bryan]

Even so if you're considering choosing a product on that basis that some old chap has blind faith in some croney quack who can't offer a shred of proof, you need to rethink

It's with considerable amusement that I'd watch you keel-over nearly dead from a heart attack, if some "croney quack" (an MD, PhD) tried to tell you that you better get to the nearest emergency room immediately, but you REFUSE, saying: "You can't give me a shred of proof that I'm having a heart attack!"

 

[Jacob]

See my previous post...Yep..it's official....... :shock:

 

[majorsixth]

Even so if you're considering choosing a product on that basis that some old chap has blind faith in some croney quack who can't offer a shred of proof, you need to rethink

It's with considerable amusement that I'd watch you keel-over nearly dead from a heart attack, if some "croney quack" (an MD, PhD) tried to tell you that you better get to the nearest emergency room immediately, but you REFUSE, saying: "You can't give me a shred of proof that I'm having a heart attack!"

How nasty is this? Are you seriously suggesting that the diagnosis for heart attacks are the same as your promotion of snake oil that's produced by a dr?

When it comes down to the truth, you have no evidence to back your claims ! Infact all your reports on proxiphen are anecdotal in all respects. Yet you have made it clear to other posters repeatly over the years that anecdotal reports can not be considered worthy of belief. Why do you continue to taint the forums with unsubstantiate anecdotal rubbish then?

 

[tinytim30]

Bryan i want to ask are you using proxiphen or any other products and i know it sells for $100 not inc post for a very tiny container are you supposed to apply once a day on a wet scalp? and why does dr proctor not answer emails.
I would like to try it with his nano shampoo and then see the outcome in six months. :dunno:

 

[tinytim30]

And jacob are you the natural product guru as in the other hair sites?

 

[Jacob]

If you've been reading these threads..you know Bryan doesn't and hasn't(supposedly) used the crap he pushes...in ages. Save your money.

And yes..it's me...doke :smack:

 

[Bryan]

How nasty is this? Are you seriously suggesting that the diagnosis for heart attacks are the same as your promotion of snake oil that's produced by a dr?

When it comes down to the truth, you have no evidence to back your claims ! Infact all your reports on proxiphen are anecdotal in all respects. Yet you have made it clear to other posters repeatly over the years that anecdotal reports can not be considered worthy of belief. Why do you continue to taint the forums with unsubstantiate anecdotal rubbish then?

Don't base your beliefs on what you consider "unsubstantiated anecdotal rubbish" to be, based on what a couple of people on an Internet forum say; base it on what DOCTORS say, especially ones who have researched this subject for _decades_. Be smart, not stupid.

 

[Bryan]

Bryan i want to ask are you using proxiphen or any other products and i know it sells for $100 not inc post for a very tiny container are you supposed to apply once a day on a wet scalp? and why does dr proctor not answer emails.

I haven't used any products for quite a long time, although I used to do that in the past. I wouldn't apply topical products to a WET scalp, although it may be helpful to do that to a MOIST scalp. I don't know why Dr. Proctor doesn't answer emails. How many times have you done that, and how long have you been waiting? Have you tried calling him on the phone, during normal business hours? He's located in Houston, Texas.

I would like to try it with his nano shampoo and then see the outcome in six months. :dunno:

It might work for you if you use only NANO shampoo, but I'd much prefer using Prox-N as a more reasonable compromise between Proxiphen and NANO shampoo. It contains _some_ of the powerful ingredients of Proxiphen (TEMPO/TEMPOL and PBN), without being quite as expensive as Proxiphen.