Hair Loss - Now I am confused....

classified ads


shop
Forum News Hair Transplant Hair Replacement Topical All Natural Drugs Hair Multiplication Gallery Female Hair Loss

Hair Loss

Forum Index   Personal Journal   Poll

Log in | User | Register

Search:  
Back to forum
Board view

Hair Transplant Reviews & Patient Records
 click here
 

Now I am confused.... (Propecia, Avodart, Spiro, DHT & hormones ...)

posted by gc1961, 06.09.2007, 09:14

» » Bryan,
» »
» » Yep I read this paper as well as many others.
» »
» » To me the heading and first paragraph seem to argue against your
» » interpretation; "More Questions than answers" and "....usually
» » exhibiting hair growth inhibitory properties".
»
» Also, notice their use of the word "surprising" when they first mention
» the growth stimulation of estrogen in their own experiment. That,
» together with the part about "More Questions than Answers...", is a simple
» acknowledgement of an affront to the authors' longstanding assumption
» (along with that of many others) that estrogen doesn't have an OPPOSITE
» effect on hair follicles (just like androgens do), depending on the
» specific site of the hair follicles. Give them a little credit for
» being extremely cautious and conservative when they come face-to-face with
» an entirely new medical paradigm! ;-)
»
» Their wording doesn't "argue against" the evidence that they saw with
» their own eyes, it's just an acknowledgement of the surprise they felt
» from confronting such a completely new paradigm. Something completely
» different for THEM, anyway: Dr. Proctor has been discussing that issue
» for years on alt.baldspot (that androgens AND estrogens show paradoxically
» opposite site-specific effects on hair follicles)! :-P
»
» » What I dislike about this study as a basis of hard conclusions is that
» the
» » sample count is 1 (ok maybe 2) and it doesn't even say if the guy was
» » displaying MPB!
»
» Oh, is THAT your only defense against all this evidence? That these 2
» very carefully tested case studies (along with the many more subjects from
» the Kiesewetter studies, not to mention the countless examples of
» successful topical estrogen use from Europe) are just statistical
» flukes? Come on, GC, you can do better than that.
»
» Well...I take that back: maybe that IS the best you can do! :-D
Bryan,

So now the reason the researchers are careful is because the weight of scientific literature has been stating Estrogen is bad; but I thought your position was that it overwhelmingly supported that estrogen was good?

Which is your position on the balance of scientific literature, I am confused?

You do seem to ignore the 2 research papers that report that Estrogen clearly inhibit telogen to anagen transition, and the groing evidence of the different roles of ER-alpha, ER-beta and ER-INS.

Instead you come out firing with a paper based on a statistically irrelevant test; sample size = 1 (or 2) and where the sample is questionable in terms of MPB history.

Hardly a convincing case!

Please put the text of the other paper you ref and the forum readers will see other waek science at work. I read it; nothing convincing.


gc1961 is located in [NA] and he is available to meet: NO

Post reply
 

Complete thread:

Back to forum
Board view
38631 Postings in 3566 Threads, 1612 registered users
Hair Loss | Admin contact
powered by MLF | FORUM POLICY

Dr. Klein's REMOX: most comprehensive topical hair loss therapy
click here