Search

everythingexperts & clinicslearnresearchcommunity

for

Search:↓

The conversation discusses using topical dutasteride with a dermapen for hair loss treatment. The user is deciding between liposomal and mesosomal formulations for this purpose.

The user has DUPA and suspects autoimmune activity as a cause. They have tried various treatments including finasteride, minoxidil, dutasteride, pyrilutamide, estrogel, hydrocortisone, and clobetasol, and are now seeking a long-term immunosuppressant.

Fluridil, a non-steroidal anti-androgen approved for alopecia in parts of Europe, is noted for its low side effects but is not commonly discussed. The user is inquiring if anyone prefers it over other anti-androgens like Spiro or RU58841.

Fluridil's effectiveness and safety in treating hair loss are discussed, with higher concentrations showing potential success. Comparisons are made to other treatments like RU58841, Pyri, CB-03-01, and topical spironalactone.

OP wants to buy fluridil from China and needs advice on mixing it in a topical solution due to budget constraints. They cannot afford Eucapil.

The conversation is about comparing the effectiveness of fluridil and clascoterone in preventing hair loss and inquiring about their use as standalone treatments. There is a question about the concentration of the fluridil brand for efficacy.

The conversation discusses using homemade topical finasteride for hair loss, showing an increase in DHT levels despite treatment. The user applies 0.125mg daily, resulting in 113.4% of previous DHT levels.

User asks if stacking Alfatradiol and Fluridil is effective for hair loss. Alfatradiol is a weaker, topical 5ar inhibitor, while Fluridil is an anti-androgen preventing DHT binding to hair follicles.

The user experienced side effects from finasteride and is considering adding Alfatradiol or Fluridil to their regimen, which includes Minoxidil, dermarolling, and ketoconazole. Fluridil is noted to be more effective than Alfatradiol but less effective than finasteride, with mild side effects reported.

The conversation discusses the delay in bringing FAK inhibitors and Stanford's hydrogel to market for hair transplants, with a preference for FAK inhibitors over Verteporfin due to their superior potential in preventing scarring. The user expresses frustration over the slow progress and hopes for faster development by companies like FAKnostics.

The conversation discusses using very low dose topical finasteride to achieve specific serum DHT reduction percentages. It concludes that finasteride dosage increases linearly between 5-30% DHT reduction but requires exponential increases for reductions up to 70%.

Fluridil was discussed as a hair loss treatment, with some users experiencing side effects like lethargy and chest tightness. Users also mentioned other treatments like RU58841 and finasteride, with mixed opinions on their effectiveness.

A peptide-based delivery system for finasteride shows promise in reducing systemic side effects while maintaining hair growth effectiveness. Combining this with other treatments like minoxidil and RU58841 could enhance results with lower systemic absorption.

User mixed RU58841 with stemoxydine, experienced no side effects. Mixing RU58841 with fluridil caused chest tightness.

Topical finasteride results in plasma levels 100 times lower than oral finasteride, potentially reducing systemic side effects. Users report similar efficacy with fewer side effects, suggesting a preference for topical application.

The user has been using Dutasteride for five years and noticed slow thinning on the frontal hairline. They tried Fluridil as an additional treatment, which resulted in noticeable hairline thickening after two months.

The user has been using finasteride, minoxidil, and a derma stamp for 3 months with significant improvement. They are now adding ketoconazole to their routine.

Fluridil, also known as Topilutamide or Eucapil, is discussed as a treatment for hair loss. It is noted as an androgen receptor antagonist, not a vasodilator.

Topical finasteride concentrations are likely much higher than necessary for effective follicular DHT suppression, with current standards being 100-1000 times above the theoretical minimum. Lower concentrations (0.001-0.0025%) might still work locally while minimizing systemic exposure.

Topical dutasteride may have limited absorption due to its higher molecular mass compared to finasteride, potentially affecting its efficacy in suppressing DHT locally. Microneedling might enhance dutasteride absorption, possibly offering stronger local DHT suppression with fewer systemic effects.