Search

everythinglearnresearchcommunity

for

Search:↓

RU58841 worsened hair condition, causing thinning and unusual patterns. The user stopped using it two months ago but hasn't seen recovery, and there's speculation about androgen receptor upregulation.

RU58841 caused severe side effects like heart palpitations and shortness of breath, leading the user to stop using it. Minoxidil and finasteride were effective without side effects, while RU58841's safety and effectiveness remain uncertain.

A 22-year-old male experienced hair loss potentially linked to escitalopram, which stopped after switching to vortioxetine. His depressive symptoms improved with continued treatment.

The conversation discusses finding a source for RU58841 in Australia. Users suggest that while RU58841 is effective, it may harm the scalp, and recommend trying koshine's kx as a safer alternative.

The user is considering RU58841 and has been using dutasteride since age 17. They are seeking affordable SARD options, mentioning ASC-J9, GT20029, and AH001.

User asks if HMI 115 hasn't done phase 1 for AGA in humans. Conversation includes treatments Min, Fin, and RU.

The user has been using RU58841 for 6 months without noticeable results and is considering dropping it while continuing oral minoxidil, daily dutasteride, and topical minoxidil. Another user suggests visiting a dermatologist to check for other conditions.

OP developed hives after using Kx 826 (Pyrilutamide) 1% twice daily for 3 weeks. The hives appeared on the arms, chest, and groin area.

AH-001 is a new topical treatment designed to degrade androgen receptors, targeting the root cause of androgenetic alopecia without the side effects of oral treatments like finasteride. It has shown a strong safety profile and good local tolerability in early trials.

RU58841 has significantly improved the user's hair loss experience, alongside oral finasteride, dutasteride, 5 mg minoxidil, topical finasteride, dermastamping, and low-level laser therapy. The user is considering increasing their RU58841 dose from 75 mg to 100-150 mg daily.

The user does not respond well to minoxidil and is seeking an alternative to Tretinoin to upregulate sulfurtransferase activity for hair loss treatment. No specific alternative treatments were mentioned.

Hair loss treatments discussed include Minoxidil, Finasteride, and RU58841. HMI-115, a monoclonal antibody drug, is in phase 1 and 2 trials for different conditions, but its availability on the gray market is unlikely due to high production costs.

Women experienced severe reactions, including Topical Steroid Withdrawal (TSW), from using Winlevi (Clascoterone 1%) on their faces. Concerns were raised about the potential risks of higher concentrations, especially for hair loss treatment.

The conversation is about finding a cheaper source for RU58841, with a suggestion to use Chemyo. One user suggests that RU58841 may not be necessary.

The post discusses a phase 2 trial for HMI-115, a hair loss treatment, in China, specifically seeking volunteers aged 18-65 with Norwood 3 vertex, 4, and 5 hair loss. The conversation includes questions about the specific recruitment criteria and how to volunteer.

RU58841 from Vantanex is discussed for hair loss treatment. Users share experiences and question its legitimacy.

RU58841's side effects may be exaggerated due to anxiety, with some users experiencing no issues and others reporting symptoms like chest pain. RU58841, minoxidil, and finasteride are used for hair loss treatment, with varying individual reactions.

User added RU58841 to their hair loss treatment and experienced quick results. Others also reported positive effects, but one user experienced chest pains as a side effect.

KX-826 (Pyrilutamide) 0.5% and 1.0% solutions showed promising results in increasing hair count for male androgenetic alopecia, with the 0.5% dose slightly outperforming the 1% dose. The treatment was well-tolerated with no sexual side effects, but skepticism remains due to past inconsistencies in trial results.

High frequency ultrasonography and HR-MRI can help identify hair shedding causes like inflammation and fibrosis. The conversation discusses the potential of using these technologies to evaluate treatments like Verteporfin for hair regeneration.

Mixing RU58841 with minoxidil compounded with tretinoin is discussed, with concerns about systemic absorption. Topical dutasteride and finasteride are also mentioned as treatments, with varying personal experiences and concerns about side effects.

Pyrilutimide and CB-03-01, two treatments for hair loss, have similar clinical trial results despite different binding affinities to androgen receptors. Factors other than binding affinity, like the time a drug stays bound to the receptor, may influence their effectiveness.

RU58841 powder may degrade over time, even when stored in a freezer. Users discuss its potential effectiveness after three years of storage.

The user is seeking alternative hair loss treatments due to side effects from finasteride and minoxidil. They are inquiring about the availability of gt20029 from u-lab.

Female considering adding topical anti-androgen, seeks advice on RU58841 or pyrilutamid's binding affinity compared to spironolactone.

The user has been using finasteride and minoxidil for hair loss but experienced worsening temple recession. They suspect they might be more sensitive to testosterone and are considering trying RU58841 or CB 03 01 as additional treatments.

The user is considering reducing RU58841 dosage from 100mg to 17.5mg for long-term safety due to brain fog issues from finasteride. They apply RU58841 only to the front of the scalp where thinning occurs.

OP believes RU58841 affected their thyroid, causing hypothyroidism and impacting minoxidil's effectiveness. They plan to start thyroid medication to improve hair regrowth.

RU58841 is a strong non-steroidal antiandrogen for hair loss but may cause cardiovascular issues in some users. Alternatives like Pyrilutamide and Breezula are suggested due to better safety profiles and lower systemic risks.

The conversation discusses the safety study of PP405, emphasizing that early trials focus on safety rather than efficacy, and that any efficacy data from such a short study should be viewed skeptically. It also highlights that the information released is primarily for securing funding, and that meaningful efficacy results are expected in later phases.