I dunno, it´s up to people´s preferences and if there are a couple of promising pics backing it up... it´s hard to make a prediction before it´s widely used and there´s a general consensus.
The fact is the science behind RU seems promising, and people have fantasized with his potential for a number of years since he was first mentioned, but based on what I´ve observed, I think androgen receptor blockers, or androgen formation inhibitors, or anything that interferes in the process of blocking the "hormonal signalling process" such as finasteride, dutasteride, flutamide, spironolactone, ect... that is the group where I include RU, have got good effect on manteinance, but little on regrowth, and I think RU is going to follow this pattern.
IMO, via those kind of drugs we are not going to find a "cure" a posteriori for baldness never, as once the harm is done, they are not capable of restoring the follicle size to the normal status.
(now I´m going to speculate a bit, since I´m not that interested onto research, and I just read the things more or less enough to think I half-understand them)
It seems that the inmune reaction is what´s next to point, as it seems inmunosupresants have great ability to regrow hair. I think if they just find a way to deliver it at a depth enough to act in the follicle and not systemically... or an specific carrier to where the inmune system acts over the follicle. Also it would be nice they could find which compounds or signals or reactions need the follicle specifically to enlarge, and what mollecules or specific reaction makes it to miniaturize.
I think there should be more research in the specific biochemistry of the follicle parts that are directly involved when the follicle grows in size, and when it miniaturizes. I can understand there could be thousands of complications in studying this, giving it is a dynamic process with complex biochemistry to analyze, the potential differences between in-vivo and in-vitro, etc..
I´m possitive this is the way to find a "cure", because I´m possitive there´s a cure that doesn´t involve HM, cloning follicles or any external transplant. Just biochemical compounds. I´m also sure that this biochemical compounds are not common ones in nature, or/and they should be managed properly to direct where they should attack. Why?. Simply: if it would have been any easier, we´d have it by now, given the balding man has tried anything in his head, from cow sh*t to Azelaic Acid:wink: .
f someone would give me 10 million $ for instruments and laboratory material, a location, a 5 person team, cooperation with a couple of universities and some time to perform full studies, I think I´d have it fixed once and forever:lol: :lol:.
Now seriously, I think if a major company would have put 200 million $ over the table for serious research (that´s the quantity they put for metals development research, energy optimizing process research, telecom research, and normal/serious investigations, even without any secure form of knowing they are going to get any result) we´d have found something better than what we have now. Maybe for pharmaceuticals, hair-loss isn´t a good market. Maybe that´s why the major research right now is done by new companies, with the investment money of an obscure clinic, known in the past by his dodgy methods and results, and not by any of the major companies like Glaxo or Pfizer.
Btw, it´s curious how they had a moment when they all had a product in the hair loss market (well Glaxo almost had it...), and now they haven´t come with anything new since then...
