When my hair was longer (bangs, long in back) the weight worked against me and made the hair (front and vertex) look thin. Parting the longer hair just made the thinness at the part more obvious. Thinning in the front made it hard to style and generally look thin and weak. My hairline was moving back slowly, and with the glimpses of my scalp beginning to freak me out I did make some changes (cut, new meds).
Since cutting it much shorter (just shaved 1 month ago, now growing out) I really cant tell there is any thinning any longer. I dont know if that means the treatment is working and filling things in (temples do look better with minoxidil but no frontal improvement) or if that means that a shorter cut is just more flattering for thinner hair.
In any case I am happy with where things are and between minoxidil and a shorter haircut believe I will be fine for some years to come.
Some people here would probably say I had no hair loss (NW2-2.5) requiring treatment, but that is a personal decision. Only you can judge how much your hair has thinned and how quickly, and only you can judge what is acceptable and when meds are worth the cost, risk and inconvenience for you.
Personally I would rather jump on treatments "too soon" as most people don't have side effects, the cost is bearable, and for all I know I'm on a fast ride to a NW7 without treatment... Wait and see if you want, but from what I've read, current treatments are probably better at maintenence than regrowth.
