The ONLY things proven to combat hairloss are minoxidil and finasteride. I understand concerns about messing with finasteride, but minoxidil is really a no brainer. EVERYONE who wants to slow down their MPB should be running minoxidil. It's the first line of defense, not the last. As to the other stuff, there is evidence that they are anti-androgens, but that's all in vitro (test tube) evidence. It MIGHT work in vivo, but it might not. So if money isn't an issue for you, then you can run natural products like Revivogen, etc. I'm sure they won't hurt your hair, but they might not be helpful and they will impact your wallet. Generic minox is cheap as dirt and works. I'm pretty sure Spiro also helps, but it has a very short half life and your head will smell like rotten eggs.
In your case, the most obvious thing you should do is stop running test. Supra-physiological amounts of test mean supra-physiological amounts of DHT, which means bad news for your hairline. I know it sucks, but those are the facts.
Tren is safe on the hairline? I assume you are referring to the AAS Tren. From everything I've read, Tren is destructive to the hairline. But good to know that the halo was kind to you. Always helpful to hear encouraging stories like thatOriginally Posted by greaser
Anybody have success with low level laser therapy brushes? I read about them at the onset of this thread. Would be willing to invest, but would like to know if others experienced results.
I know there's little data on low doses of S4, but anyone have any breaking data on whether this SARM could actually help the prostate and/or hairloss? All I read are people with slight shedding.
As far as Sarms helping prostate, I've read on some of the sites selling sarms (questionable I know) about Sarms reducing the weight of the prostate and/or size. After searching for more credible research I found this
"SARMs with either partial agonist or anti-androgen actions in the prostate might provide a novel approach for androgen suppression in BPH treatment, without causing side-effects in the anabolic tissue and hypothalamus–pituitary–testis axis. SARMs with partial-agonist activity in the prostate and full-agonist activity in muscle and other peripheral tissues would decrease prostate size (because of their ability to work as antagonists in the presence of endogenous DHT) while avoiding the side-effects caused by nonselective inhibition by anti-androgens. Tissue selective anti-androgens are a novel approach for the treatment of BPH and prostate cancer, and can be considered as a new class of SARMs. These ligands should behave as antagonists in the prostate with either no activity or agonist activity in other target tissues."
I've been wondering that myself, if they could develop a SARM that only binds to Androgen Receptors in the hair follicle but doesn't block it anywhere else.
That would be sweet. Hair and muscle growth.
Anyone know any scientists we can pitch this one to?
Ha I wish, too much **** I would recommend.