Search

everythinglearnresearchcommunity

for

Search:↓

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.

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.

Alfatradiol is often discussed at a 1% concentration, but studies typically use 0.025%. Some users report success using it as a topical treatment alongside other hair loss treatments like finasteride.

The conversation is about someone planning to start finasteride for hair loss and wanting to interpret pre-treatment blood panels to assess the risk of side effects like gynecomastia. They list various tests to measure hormone levels and other health indicators.

The conversation is about whether testing for free DHT is necessary before starting Finasteride for hair loss, despite having other hormone tests available. One person suggests that genetic response to DHT is more important than DHT levels and advises starting Finasteride without the free DHT test.

A user preparing to start finasteride for hair loss wanted to check for any abnormal bloodwork related to hair loss. They shared their blood test results and learned from another user that their doctor prescribed finasteride without any preliminary tests.

The conversation is about a user sharing their blood test results and questioning if it's okay to start a hair loss treatment with finasteride. Specific treatments mentioned are Minoxidil, finasteride, and RU58841.

The conversation discusses the uncertainty of the legitimacy of minoxidil products in the EU market and mentions baricitinib as an approved, but expensive alternative. A method to test for real minoxidil involves mixing it with bleach to see if it turns orange or brown.

A user is seeking feedback on a homemade topical finasteride formula for hair loss, consisting of 7.5 mg of finasteride, propylene glycol, ethanol, and distilled water. They aim to achieve a 0.0125% solution by applying 2 ml daily.

ET-02 showed significant hair growth in five weeks, outperforming minoxidil, with a non-hormonal mechanism that avoids side effects of treatments like finasteride. A phase 2 trial is planned to further assess ET-02's efficacy and safety.

The conversation discusses the comparison of Pyrilutamide Phase II US trial results with 1 mg finasteride for hair loss treatment. It mentions that the total hair count increase in the US trial was not as good as the China trial.

Verteporfin is being explored for its potential to improve hair transplant outcomes by reducing scarring and increasing donor hair follicles. There is skepticism about the results, with some claiming misleading presentation of evidence.

The conversation is about which blood markers to test before starting a 5-AR inhibitor for hair loss. The user mentions already testing Total T, Free T, SHBG, Estradiol, Haematocrit, Red blood cell count, and White cell count, and asks if DHT or additional markers are needed.

User considers trying AAPE for hair restoration, costing $700 for 6 months. Others discuss its potential effectiveness and mention a study with promising results.

The user was rejected from participating in a clinical trial for an extended-release oral Minoxidil due to having rheumatoid arthritis, despite initially being accepted. They had stopped using Dutasteride and Minoxidil to qualify but continued using other treatments like RU58841 and red light therapy.

User tried various hair loss treatments with limited success. RU58841 was effective but caused side effects, now trying Eucapil and continuing Finasteride.

New hair loss treatments PP405 and VDPHL01 are discussed with skepticism and hope, alongside existing treatments like minoxidil and finasteride. Users express frustration over limited progress since the 1980s but remain cautiously optimistic.

Testing the effectiveness of Verteporfin as a potential treatment for hair loss, with users discussing their thoughts on its long-term results. Treatments mentioned include Minoxidil, Finasteride, and RU58841.

The user is using minoxidil and recently started fluridil for mild hair loss and is questioning if this treatment is sufficient without finasteride. They have finasteride available but prefer not to use it.

The post is about the potential legal trouble of bringing a four-month supply of fluridil, a hair loss treatment, into non-Western countries.

Two Chinese suppliers provided legitimate RU58841, confirmed through a free drug testing service. The vendors were Shaanxi Greenyo Biotech and Lyphar, found on Made-in-China.

3aHSD enzyme's role in hair loss and a crowdfund for research. Goal: explore new treatments, study RU58841, and develop natural topical product.

RU58841 not working for hair loss after 10 months. Concerns about purity of experimental drugs.

Phase II for TDM-105795 for Androgenic Alopecia is set to begin in April 2023. The study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TDM-105795 in male subjects.

The user got blood work to check hormone levels before starting Finasteride for hair loss and is seeking advice on interpreting the results. They are considering hormone levels in relation to potential side effects of Finasteride.

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 has been using minoxidil, finasteride, a laser cap, and ketoconazole shampoo for hair loss without success and is seeking advice on further tests or treatments. They have a family history of hair loss and have not yet undergone dermatologist or trichology tests.

The conversation is about testing the effectiveness of RU58841 for hair loss, with the user planning to increase their dose to 30 mg per day along with 20 mg of Minoxidil. The test results showed approximately 70 mg/ml, which the user considers a good result.

RU58841, a potential hair loss treatment, was not commercialized due to marketability issues and lack of long-term safety data. Concerns about its formulation and delivery methods further complicate its use.