what are YOUR thoughts on minoxidil and aging skin?

[recedingyt]

I have dealt with addiction, do you think all these psychiatric pills they gave me to ease my hair loss induced anxiety were easy to come off?

I've been there with anti-anxiety meds, it's tough. Sucks because I actually do need them since without them my impulse control is nonexistent.

I know, I have taken this too far, sorry. Let's say I cannot conceive how someone would start smoking. I've always found that incredibly stupid.

Fair enough.

 

[Wolf Pack]

It's a very slow process in relation to smoking affecting long term health and there is no guarantee it will happen.

What Dr De Reys meant is don't smoke imminently prior to an operation. Even if I gave you Nicotine 24-48 hours before an operation, your transplant could fail too. Nicotine induces vasospasm of the arteries. Also decreases healing. These are short term effects of Nicotine, it's not dangerous per say. It's the other chemicals long term.

Ageing is largely genetic, period.

Environment and lifestyle plays a role but very limited, unless you take it to the extreme.

 

[recedingyt]

Do you guys think the vasoconstriction caused by smoking would inhibit absorption/efficacy of minoxidil? Just a random thought that popped into my head reading your posts. I couldn't find anything about it after a quick google search.

 

[Joan]

Ageing is largely genetic, period.

At 52, I can say that's absolutely true. My mother (81) smoked heavily until she was 61 and was a sun worshipper when she was young, and she has very few wrinkles. I've been using Rogaine for over a year and haven't experienced anything other than normal aging. To some degree, your lifestyle will affect how you age physically, but, in my opinion, most of it will depend on your genetics. And guys, if you want to know how your GFs will look when they get older, just take a look at their mothers.

 

[Wolf Pack]

I like that, bring everything back to hair recedingyt I would say, no. Minoxidil goes to your hair follicles directly.

- - - Updated - - -

At 52, I can say that's absolutely true. My mother (81) smoked heavily until she was 61 and was a sun worshipper when she was young, and she has very few wrinkles. I've been using Rogaine for over a year and haven't experienced anything other than normal aging. To some degree, your lifestyle will affect how you age physically, but, in my opinion, most of it will depend on your genetics. And guys, if you want to know how your GFs will look when they get older, just take a look at their mothers.

Yes exactly, my experience tells me similar. My mum and my gf's mum still look pretty young. A lot of people get all hypochondriac about ageing and the advertisers bank on that. Look at those old black farmers in Africa out in the sun without much access to fancy creams, many look like 20 years younger still. It's good you have those genetics Joan

 

[xetudor]

Genetics are super important but why the **** would you destroy your body with smoking? You don't know how long you're ment to live so why risk SO much for basically nothing? Some little risks in life are what makes it more interesting but smoking is not one of those.

People are so afraid of ED here but I bet a lot of those people smoke and they don't even know smoking can cause ED. It's a stupid habit that wreaks havoc on your body.

 

[I.D WALKER]

We are a world tugging at extremes. We know even too much of a "good thing" can produce bodily detriment. Hyperoxia or oxygen oversaturation may be a fair example of extreme positional argumentation.

 

[Joan]

When I work, I know a chunk of my money is going to go to healthcare so they can pay for these smokers and fat people's lung cancer treatments and bypass surgeries.

And how much money do Androgenetic Alopecia sufferers get for hair loss treatments? Not a dime.

 

[I.D WALKER]

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/11394043/...s-paying-extra-health-insurance/#.VfBuEy7H_IU This purported action has not made much of a positive impact on insurers that I can see today.

Most notably alcohol abuse and/or alcohol crime related incident has done more harm/costlier than probably all problems combined.

 

[recedingyt]

In the end, these debate is similar to the fat shaming one. All I hear from society is: you can't judge smokers! You can't judge fat people!

These are usually the same people who will harshly judge someone who is balding.

So you can never judge someone for his poor choices, but it's OK to judge a condition that one has not control over?

Some members here have been brainwashed by these politically correct discourses. Of course you can judge others for their bad choices. We all do.

That's actually how we construct our identity. In my experience, those who tell you that you cannot judge will be the first one to judge.

They judge you because you judge others. Oh the irony.

It's not like smoking and being fat are not doing us non-fat and non-smokers people harm.

When I work, I know a chunk of my money is going to go to healthcare so they can pay for these smokers and fat people's lung cancer treatments and bypass surgeries.

So yes, I will continue to judge people for their bad choices, especially if they affect me personally because of the healthcare system.

I don't think anyone disagrees that we should be able to judge the poor choices of others. Do you think smokers are killing themselves/perpetuating a nasty habit that has indirect negative effects on the rest of us? I agree, and you should be able to say so. But calling someone stupid because they smoke is a stretch at best and just makes you look like an immature little brat screaming something like "you live your life differently than I do, what are you some kind of IDIOT!?!"... not exactly constructive criticism (not to mention it's needlessly argumentative), which if you actually cared about people smoking/wanted them to stop, that's the type of conversation you would aim to have. It's not a matter of political correctness, it's a matter of not being a dick for the sake of being a dick and trying to act superior to others just because you don't smoke.

tl;dr - bash someone for their choices all you want, but making personal attacks on something unrelated to the topic at hand is at least as stupid as you seem to think smokers are.

 

[abcdefg]

People can and do judge people all the time based on everything whether under your control or not. Most people honestly have no idea what causes male pattern baldness or if its under someone control or not. Hell no one really knows what causes male pattern baldness even still like how exactly it is passed down from generations and who will get it to what extent.
Back to topic there is no connection between minoxidil and aging skin so there end of thread.

 

[Captain Hook]

I don't think anyone disagrees that we should be able to judge the poor choices of others. Do you think smokers are killing themselves/perpetuating a nasty habit that has indirect negative effects on the rest of us? I agree, and you should be able to say so. But calling someone stupid because they smoke is a stretch at best and just makes you look like an immature little brat screaming something like "you live your life differently than I do, what are you some kind of IDIOT!?!"... not exactly constructive criticism (not to mention it's needlessly argumentative), which if you actually cared about people smoking/wanted them to stop, that's the type of conversation you would aim to have. It's not a matter of political correctness, it's a matter of not being a dick for the sake of being a dick and trying to act superior to others just because you don't smoke.

tl;dr - bash someone for their choices all you want, but making personal attacks on something unrelated to the topic at hand is at least as stupid as you seem to think smokers are.

and if it's any consolation, when I used to smoke (long before the onset of Androgenetic Alopecia, when I was 15-17) I would receive all kinds of judgment and abuse. There would be times where I light up and immediately someone, be it a passerby or a friend, would say "you're going to die" or "you really shouldn't be smoking" or "you're going to get cancer"

Those are all definitive statements, while obviously smoking is terrible for you, not every smoker gets lung cancer (the actual incidence is 8% of male smokers compared to a 1% incidence for non smokers, so as you can see smoking drastically increases the risk of lung cancer, it's just not as high as the media wants you to believe) and obviously everybody dies so when the man who said to me "you're going to die" I just sarcastically replied "what? you're going to live forever?"

(Source: http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/editorials/vol-1/e1-4.htm)

The article basically states that smoking is correlated with an increased risk of lung cancer and obviously if you smoke you're at an increased risk of getting the disease at some point in your life. It just doesn't cause lung cancer in the sense that correlation does not imply causation. (basic statistics here)

That being said I quit not only because of health reasons but also because cigarettes are cheap in HK (50 HKD or about 9.30 AUD per pack) but not so cheap in Australia where I go to uni (20-25 AUD per pack). I really didn't smoke that much either (5-20 cigarettes per week) I just thought it would be a good idea to quit before my usage increased and I wanted to save both my money and my health.

I still smoke occasionally though and have been ever since I quit at 17. By occasionally I mean 1-5 packs per year spread evenly throughout the year with several months at a time where I don't smoke at all (think 3-5 months). The only difficulty of quitting for me was psychological, it was more of a thing of association like "Oh I'm having a coffee I want a cigarette" or "Damn I want a cigarette with this beer" or even "Ah I'm playing videogames at an internet cafe that allows me to smoke, I'd really like a cigarette right now". Quitting difficulty varies for everyone, hence the advice I gave in a previous post. Both my father and my uncle who smoked a pack a day (dad for 10 years and uncle for 40 years) quit on the spot and have never relapsed afterwards.

I'm almost 21 now and if anything my occasional usage has gone down. My doctor told me I don't need to worry about this level of smoking (his reasoning being a negative statistically measurable effect from such a low level of smoking would end up being negligible to almost non-existent) as long as it doesn't increase and it hasn't, each year it's dwindled, with 2015 seeing me only smoking 5 cigarettes this year so far and I'll likely only smoke 1 pack when I get back to HK for holiday at the end of the year. I smoked about 2 packs in 2014.

Back on topic though yeah obviously cigarettes have proven negative effects on human skin. Minoxidil has no in vivo evidence to prove this at all.

 

[Captain Hook]

Usual smokers' defense mechanisms at work.

Some people in my family died from smoking, they had to finish their lives in horrible pain, not being able to breathe on their own anymore.

A big part of my family on my mother's side are heavy smokers.

And despite watching my mother's cousin die this horrible death, they will still tell you: "Nah it had nothing to do with her smoking 3 packs a day! And that won't happen to me!"

As I often say, defense mechanisms are a wonderful thing. They even work for baldness, just check out slybaldguys.

I hardly employed the typical smoker's defence mechanisms, I watched another uncle die of lung cancer, coughing up blood, in intractable pain and barely able to speak. I knew it had everything to do with his smoking and I knew it could some day happen to me, don't act like I thought I was immune.

The reason I quit is because I knew I very well could be one of the 8% who gets lung cancer. I'm very aware of the risks and while some smokers choose to live in a fool's paradise, I quit for a reason: no benefit and I'm only harming myself.

 

[Captain Hook]

8%? Damn, you really had to dig hard to get those wrong statistics.

I get it, you hate smokers and smoking, hence why you read only what you wanted to read, the CDC only states that smoking is responsible for 90% of lung cancers, not that 90% of smokers get lung cancer, since smoking increases the risk of lung cancer by a large amount it's no surprise it's going to be held responsible for the development of most cases of lung cancer. Obviously around 50% of smokers will die at the hand of their habit, but that is all-cause mortality, not lung cancer alone.

Just because you're alarmed at the actual statistic doesn't make it wrong however, do note that the doctor who authored said journal got his data from the CDC and the WHO. Have a look at these articles:

http://www.bupa.com.au/health-and-w...information/lung-cancer-and-smoking#amiatrisk

"Cigarette smoking is the major cause of lung cancer with 10 percent of smokers developing the disease"

http://www.science20.com/news_relea...ncer_genetic_biomarker_may_provide_the_answer

^The person commenting on this article is a Yale radiologist, hardly someone inclined to promote smoking, they don't work for the tobacco companies. However they also don't work for the mainstream media, the people who have brainwashed you into believing that nearly all smokers get lung cancer.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749017/

Even this good ol' PubMed study even states under the "Tobacco Metabolism" section: "Not all smokers get lung cancer, but under 20% do."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7895211

This Canadian study estimates 172/1000 male smokers will get lung cancer, a risk of about 17%

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100407144703.htm

Sourced from Boston University Medical Centre (totally a pro-tobacco institution right?) stating 10-20% of smokers will get lung cancer.

So the actual figure we're looking at is somewhere between 8-19% with 15% being the most likely. I say this because the original journal article I posted, mentioned the risk for caucasian male smokers in the US, a very specific figure. The 15% figure seems to be the general consensus. Still far lower than what the mainstream media wants you to think.

There's nothing wrong with you hating smokers and smoking, that's your opinion and you are entitled to your opinion. Just don't parrot what the media says and do some research, you went halfway, with the links you posted being true, it's just your interpretation that was off. I was talking about lung cancer risk alone in smokers, not other causes of death via smoking.

Keep in mind I do agree with your stance on smoking, there is no benefit and it only serves to harm oneself, hence why I quit.

 

[Wolf Pack]

Hook is right. I don't smoke (very rarely like a few in a year if that on a night out) but not everyone who smokes gets ill especially cancer. Usually they will see some decrease in fitness and breathing problems if they smoke life long. I still think being a pretty bald guy is worse than being a smoker in terms of the psychological distress and lack of aesthetics. Also look more unhealthy too. Some people clean shave and look younger though. But thick hair itself is key for a youthful, glowing look.

Who is the guy in you avy Hook?

 

[Captain Hook]

Hook is right. I don't smoke (very rarely like a few in a year if that on a night out) but not everyone who smokes gets ill especially cancer. Usually they will see some decrease in fitness and breathing problems if they smoke life long. I still think being a pretty bald guy is worse than being a smoker in terms of the psychological distress and lack of aesthetics. Also look more unhealthy too. Some people clean shave and look younger though. But thick hair itself is key for a youthful, glowing look.

Who is the guy in you avvy Hook?

Yeah smoking is a gamble and game of statistics, one that you're obviously more likely to lose than win. The one uncle who got lung cancer looked wrinkled and unhealthy as hell even before he got cancer, you could tell the smoking had taken a toll on him long before he fell ill. Whereas my paternal grandfather not only smoked more than my uncle (2-3 packs a day of unfiltered cigarettes) didn't suffer any smoking related illness (that we knew of, his heart failure in his sleep almost certainly could be attributed to the smoking), was NW2 until the day he died in his sleep at 84 and had beautiful skin for his age.

The guy in my avi is Captain Hook from the TV show "Once Upon A Time" he's played by Colin O'Donoghue. Riveting show and amazing actor.

 

[Wolf Pack]

You're spot on, basically saying genetics plays a massive role in ageing. Even when you take your lifestyle to the extreme. My skin is good, even had compliments from girls, I don't have a routine lol. The hair is the weakness, receding hair line but will hopefully sort it. Ah right, I'll check the show out. Looking for something to watch since I have some time off coming up.

 

[Captain Hook]

You're spot on, basically saying genetics plays a massive role in ageing. Even when you take your lifestyle to the extreme. My skin is good, even had compliments from girls, I don't have a routine lol. The hair is the weakness, receding hair line but will hopefully sort it. Ah right, I'll check the show out. Looking for something to watch since I have some time off coming up.

Indeed, definitely drop me a PM and let me know if you like it if you end up watching it.

A great example is mutations in the BRCA genes, responsible for tumour suppression. You could lead an extremely healthy lifestyle and it would do nothing to prevent your incidence of breast cancer, hence the need for prophylactic measures. Epigenetic medicine is really going to be something huge when it advances.

 

[Hadley]

I have used minoxidil for about 7-8 years and I have virtually no wrinkles or lines at all concidering my age (31).
I have to show my ID when I buy alcohol all the time, so I must look younger than I am. So minoxidil has not done my skin any harm.
I had A LOT of acne in my teens and early twenties, so I do take good care of my skin and use moisteurisers and creams every day and night. If you are around 30 and care about your skin, I recommend retinol and glycolic acid creams. They are good for preventing both acne and wrinkles. You can't expect to have smooth skin at 30 if you have never moisteurised. I started in my teens and at least my skin looks good.

I refuse to have bad hair AND bad skin!

 

[Captain Hook]

"My uncle smoked three packs a days and he died when at 97!"

Here we go.

I was only saying that my paternal grandfather wasn't one of the 15% that gets lung cancer and wasn't one of the 50% that dies from smoking related causes (at least that I know of). My uncle on the other hand was part of of the 15% that gets lung cancer and hence part of the 50% that dies from smoking related causes. A roll of the genetic dice, if you will.

Be glad I'm not one of the smokers who are like "HEY my grandpa smoked and didn't die of smoking related causes so there I'm immune!" at least I posted several studies to back up my claims, as well as anecdotes from both sides of the argument.