- Reaction score
- 461
@hairblues
I believe those people having success, and it doesn't really come as a surprise given the amount of evidence we now have on the topic of wounding and also financial backing behind this mechanism.
I'm happy for you and hope your success is sustained and results even improve over time. You've got a good point about the dilemma of newer (unproven) treatments, and the balance of benefits versus downsides. With existing (proven) treatments one can at least create an image for one self and decide if the risks are outweighted by the benefits. Still, an easy approach with dose-titrating is what I personally would prefer.
Swoop also scratched the dilemma of how good an approach to treating Androgenetic Alopecia can be and that it's highly individual of how high level of dedication is really worth it. That's why he's probably chosen a minimalistic approach. Again, downsides<benefits.
In the end, many people (including me), will find a very time-consuming regimen as confining and prison-making as the problem itself. Therefore I really hope and believe that Follica can both optimize and streamline this mechanism which clearly is efficacious. If they achieve this, it would i.m.o. be a huge accomplishment. Because, let's face it; we are not all willing to go the ''kitchen-sink'' way.
That said, I respect most wiews on Androgenetic Alopecia as a decease and it's clear we are all differently affected. For someone it may be perceived as worse than cancer and they'd be willing to try about anything to solve the negative effects of losing hair. On the other hand, there are others for whom it's not a ''dealbreaker''.
I believe those people having success, and it doesn't really come as a surprise given the amount of evidence we now have on the topic of wounding and also financial backing behind this mechanism.
I'm happy for you and hope your success is sustained and results even improve over time. You've got a good point about the dilemma of newer (unproven) treatments, and the balance of benefits versus downsides. With existing (proven) treatments one can at least create an image for one self and decide if the risks are outweighted by the benefits. Still, an easy approach with dose-titrating is what I personally would prefer.
Swoop also scratched the dilemma of how good an approach to treating Androgenetic Alopecia can be and that it's highly individual of how high level of dedication is really worth it. That's why he's probably chosen a minimalistic approach. Again, downsides<benefits.
In the end, many people (including me), will find a very time-consuming regimen as confining and prison-making as the problem itself. Therefore I really hope and believe that Follica can both optimize and streamline this mechanism which clearly is efficacious. If they achieve this, it would i.m.o. be a huge accomplishment. Because, let's face it; we are not all willing to go the ''kitchen-sink'' way.
That said, I respect most wiews on Androgenetic Alopecia as a decease and it's clear we are all differently affected. For someone it may be perceived as worse than cancer and they'd be willing to try about anything to solve the negative effects of losing hair. On the other hand, there are others for whom it's not a ''dealbreaker''.
Last edited:
