Hair Loss - RonLev, why aren't you answering my questions?

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

Propecia Comprehensive Survey Results
click here
 

RonLev, why aren't you answering my questions? (Topicals)

posted by Bryan, 02.06.2008, 01:07

» Bryan,
»
» I don't think our recent exchanges have really changed my position or
» yours, so I haven't responded to some of these replies. My position, as
» I have stated, is that flutamide has shown a greater effectiveness (and a
» greater duration of effectiveness over several years of use, which is just
» as important) in regrowing and/or retaining hair, at the expense of some
» systemic absorption and consequently some side effects, which vary from
» one individual patient to another.

What I've tried to understand about your position is how you explain the contrary results of most of the animal experiments with topical flutamide. Trying to draw that information out of you has been quite a formidable task, especially when you won't answer specific questions. I assure you that my questions aren't at all rhetorical, they are there for a very specific purpose, and they are very deliberate.

» Your focus on one (animal) study...

There are THREE animal studies that I'm aware of which tested topical flutamide in animals (rodents). The latest one is the Sintov study, with which I'm sure you are already quite familiar. The two earlier studies are the ones I cited in an earlier post. The Chen et al study clearly demonstrated a TOTAL lack of any "local" effect whatsoever. The other remaining one from 1975 had rather similar results as Chen et al.

» ...simply confirms that
» flutamide's effects can be systemic, they do not preclude
» that their effects can also be local, especially when doses are
» titrated--NO STUDY HAS BEEN PUBLISHED TO DENY OR CONFIRM THIS

But I've already explained to you that the Chen et al study _does_ show a complete absence of any local effect, including when the dose is titrated to lower levels. You can clearly see that in the graph that I posted for you, from that study.

Do you understand now why I'm complaining about your lack of responsiveness to everything I've been posting? If you found fault with the scientific evidence that I've been presenting, why are you only NOW apparently denying the powerful evidence of the Chen et al study? Why didn't you do that way back when I first posted it?

» I don't think we need to belabor our differences
» in opinion. That is where my position stands, and
» it is not disputed by our dermatologic consultants.

I'd be satisfied just to KNOW exactly what your position is! ;-)

Do you or do you not believe the results of the Chen et al study, and the other one from 1975? If you believe and accept them, then what is your rationale for thinking that your new MDF product can be useful for humans? Do you believe that your product has a "local" effect, despite the findings of those earlier studies? If so, WHY do you believe that? Do you believe that the rodents used in those earlier studies absorb topical flutamide in some way, shape, or fashion which precludes them from having a "local" effect, as opposed to what happens when it's used in humans? Or do you believe that the specialized vehicle that you're using in your product accounts for the difference? I just want you to TELL ME WHAT YOU BELIEVE, and don't leave me guessing! :-)

» Bryan, have you ever been faced with accepting or rejecting
» a treatment that your doctor considered justified after he duly
» advised you of possible side effects?

No, that hasn't happened to me yet (see how I'm careful to answer YOUR questions? ;-)).

.


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


Complete thread:

38190 Postings in 3523 Threads, 1604 registered users
Hair Loss | Admin contact
powered by MLF | FORUM POLICY

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