Bald Guy Regrows Hair With Birth Control Pills

[DhtAssassin]

The theory that androgens promote scalp hair growth is still bizarre to me. How would it explain results from topical anti-androgens then?
https://www.belgraviacentre.com/blog/clascoterone-genetic-hair-loss-treatment-trial-update/

This drug is now supposed to enter phase 3 for MPB.

There is also another drug from 2005 which also had results, but didn't reach the market due to funding.

Same with this guy - nuked his androgens, got scalp regrowth.. We just have too much proof for androgens to be bad for SCALP hair. I'm not talking about beard and other body parts.

 

[mrchibbs]

The theory that androgens promote scalp hair growth is still bizarre to me. How would it explain results from topical anti-androgens then?
https://www.belgraviacentre.com/blog/clascoterone-genetic-hair-loss-treatment-trial-update/

This drug is now supposed to enter phase 3 for MPB.

There is also another drug from 2005 which also had results, but didn't reach the market due to funding.

Same with this guy - nuked his androgens, got scalp regrowth.. We just have too much proof for androgens to be bad for SCALP hair. I'm not talking about beard and other body parts.

Thanks for the link, I'd never heard of clacosterone. You're right to question everything. We could be wrong (us here on the RPF) in thinking that androgens do not cause hair loss. They may be part of the issue. But based on all the evidence I've seen, my understanding is that androgens like DHT are merely elevated as an adaptive measure, they don't cause hair loss. I think this explains why Valerie Randall found that topical DHT would increase hair growth, or even how Papa and Kligman found that topical testosterone increased hair growth in bald men way back in 1965

Clacosterone, once more, seems to be a progesterone derivative, and it seems to me that every single hair loss medication is made from progesterone, and they emphasize its anti-androgenic effect while not considering it's more potent effects on lowering the stress hormones, opposing estrogen and increasing progesterone itself.

[Clacosterone]...is a synthetic pregnane steroid and a derivative of progesterone and 11-deoxycortisol (cortexolone).[9] It is specifically the C17α propionate ester of 11-deoxycortisol. -Wikipedia

I think researchers are starting to realize that the anti-androgenic effects do not reflect the systemic mechanism of action of the various progestins, even specifically in the case of clacosterone:

Its pharmacological activity seemed to be primarily related to its ability to antagonistically compete at androgen receptor level; nevertheless its primary pharmacological target needs to be further investigated.

You could be right in saying that androgens affect scalp hair differently, although to borrow your words, that has always felt bizarre to me. Why would scalp follicles be more "sensitive" to androgens? Certainly not genetics. Men with great scalp hair growth typically have great androgen levels, including DHT. And there is some evidence that DHT helps the hair follicles grow stronger.

I think the difference with scalp hair vs. other follicles of beard and body hair, is explained by two factors:

1) it is a concentrated area with a lot of follicles, and these follicles are more energy-intensive than other body hair follicles, because they can grow much longer than other body hair, and they have very long hair cycles (covering years). This makes it more difficult to sustain hair growth when the physiology goes awry.

2) There is a relative microvascular insufficiency in top area of the scalp. Blood and nutrient supply to the vertex and frontal regions are more easily disrupted, and there isn't enough movement of the occipital-frontalis muscles to prevent fibrosis of the tissues, contrary to the side of the scalp which is always stimulated by chewing, or the neck muscles. Feet and hands, for instance, also get cold from insufficient circulation, but they are used the tissues are stimulated all the time, so fibrosis doesn't set in.

 

[ruprmurdoch]

very intresting, but it's bad, in my opinion ,way to treat his problem that way like this guy , beacuse:

,,It was 11 years of uses HRT supplies for hair loss treatment. It also was "fully" 10 years of leaving from ex sex partner. I never do sex with anyone. I just lived pretend to be "virgin man".

 

[Broco6679]

I think researchers are starting to realize that the anti-androgenic effects do not reflect the systemic mechanism of action of the various progestins, even specifically in the case of clacosterone:

Exactly this. Modern medicine is still obsessed with the 'lock and key' model, where a specific molecule has a specific receptor that matches it's own conformation shape; and said molecule exerts it's action only by interacting with said receptor, while remaining inert to everything else in the cell. In reality, this just isn't the case.

If a drug has the ability to bind to and inhibit the androgen receptor, it's systemic effects are not going to be isolated solely to androgen receptor inhibition. Moreover, it is clear that hormones exert a great deal their effects within the cell independent of receptor activation. Attributing the entirety of a drugs effect to it's ability to bind to a single protein is extremely reductionist.

Also, where do people think androgen receptor antagonist drugs come from? You have to start with a molecule that already has high affinity to bind to the ar, without possessing intrinsic efficacy - if it had the latter, it would just be another androgen. Progestin-based drugs serve this purpose well, which is why virtually all anti-androgen's are made starting with a progestin.

But again, to then attribute this progestin-based drug's entire mechanism of action to it's interaction with a single protein is just too reductionist. Endogenous progesterone possess the ability to antagonize the androgen receptor - does that mean that progesterone's role in preparing the uterus for implantation of the embryo is mediated by it's ability to antagonize the androgen receptor? Of course not. This same thought process should be applied to progestin-based drugs that can regrow hair.

The new wave of 'evidence based' medicine has meant that the underlying physiology is largely ignored in favor of results. If something produces the desired outcome, who cares how it does it, right? Well, no; that same logic is how we end up giving people with depression SSRI's, despite the positive effects the drugs can cause (in a small amount of people) being nothing to do with the increase in serotonin, which itself is extremely dangerous.

 

[mrchibbs]

Endogenous progesterone possess the ability to antagonize the androgen receptor - does that mean that progesterone's role in preparing the uterus for implantation of the embryo is mediated by it's ability to antagonize the androgen receptor? Of course not.

Sometimes I think about the widespread influence that pharmaceutical companies have had over the culture, through TV ads, lobbying, financial pressure and reps influencing doctors, and it scares me. When you think about it, no one really knows about scientific results, not even the doctors who barely read any literature. The only thing people are bound to know about certain diseases is the information disseminated by the pharmaceutical companies. And since their only interest has been perpetuating sources of profit, false theories keep alive dangerous medications.

Almost nobody knows anything about Progesterone, DHEA etc. despite the fact that the knowledge Ray has comes from the direct scientific literature of the 30s, 40s and 50s. In the 90s Merck convinced everyone that 5-ar was basically a useless enzyme and it was safe to inhibit its formation. That was criminal, and yet they will never be prosecuted, because they have immunity.

Progesterone is always seen merely as a very specific pregnancy-related hormone, despite the fact that it is the starting material for thousands of proprietary progestins. It's obvious that the Pharma companies know all about progesterone's therapeutic potential, but since its use predates the FDA (and therefore cannot be patented), it has been like DHEA, nearly totally absent from the medical world for half a century. DHEA, despite its clear association as a protective hormone of youth, is nearly totally unknown outside academic researchers.

The new wave of 'evidence based' medicine has meant that the underlying physiology is largely ignored in favor of results. If something produces the desired outcome, who cares how it does it, right? Well, no; that same logic is how we end up giving people with depression SSRI's

Ray has made a similar argument many times. Nobody uses 'system thinking' anymore, it's direct reductionism. Medical school is geared towards the technological applications of pharmaceutical compounds, and the understanding of specific compounds for specific symptoms. The establishment will fight to save SSRIs (for monetary reasons, as well as misplaced pride) for the upcoming decades, but their use will eventually cease.

 

[Estradiol]

Thanks for the link, I'd never heard of clacosterone. You're right to question everything. We could be wrong (us here on the RPF) in thinking that androgens do not cause hair loss. They may be part of the issue. But based on all the evidence I've seen, my understanding is that androgens like DHT are merely elevated as an adaptive measure, they don't cause hair loss. I think this explains why Valerie Randall found that topical DHT would increase hair growth, or even how Papa and Kligman found that topical testosterone increased hair growth in bald men way back in 1965

Clacosterone, once more, seems to be a progesterone derivative, and it seems to me that every single hair loss medication is made from progesterone, and they emphasize its anti-androgenic effect while not considering it's more potent effects on lowering the stress hormones, opposing estrogen and increasing progesterone itself.



I think researchers are starting to realize that the anti-androgenic effects do not reflect the systemic mechanism of action of the various progestins, even specifically in the case of clacosterone:




You could be right in saying that androgens affect scalp hair differently, although to borrow your words, that has always felt bizarre to me. Why would scalp follicles be more "sensitive" to androgens? Certainly not genetics. Men with great scalp hair growth typically have great androgen levels, including DHT. And there is some evidence that DHT helps the hair follicles grow stronger.

I think the difference with scalp hair vs. other follicles of beard and body hair, is explained by two factors:

1) it is a concentrated area with a lot of follicles, and these follicles are more energy-intensive than other body hair follicles, because they can grow much longer than other body hair, and they have very long hair cycles (covering years). This makes it more difficult to sustain hair growth when the physiology goes awry.

2) There is a relative microvascular insufficiency in top area of the scalp. Blood and nutrient supply to the vertex and frontal regions are more easily disrupted, and there isn't enough movement of the occipital-frontalis muscles to prevent fibrosis of the tissues, contrary to the side of the scalp which is always stimulated by chewing, or the neck muscles. Feet and hands, for instance, also get cold from insufficient circulation, but they are used the tissues are stimulated all the time, so fibrosis doesn't set in.

That's a great study.

Sustanon dissolved in Vitamin E? Maybe we can add progesterone ampoule too.

 

[Estradiol]

The theory that androgens promote scalp hair growth is still bizarre to me. How would it explain results from topical anti-androgens then?
https://www.belgraviacentre.com/blog/clascoterone-genetic-hair-loss-treatment-trial-update/

This drug is now supposed to enter phase 3 for MPB.

There is also another drug from 2005 which also had results, but didn't reach the market due to funding.

Same with this guy - nuked his androgens, got scalp regrowth.. We just have too much proof for androgens to be bad for SCALP hair. I'm not talking about beard and other body parts.

Not all androgens are equal. When your gonadal production decreases, adrenal glands starts to produce adrenal androgens.

I don't even call them "androgen". Just like cortisol, aldosterone these androgens are stress promoter substance. Also elevated in prostate cancer.

 

[mrchibbs]

That's a great study.

Sustanon dissolved in Vitamin E? Maybe we can add progesterone ampoule too.

Maybe? It's not like we should expect total regrowth from topical agents though. It was only about 10% regrowth with the topical testosterone. You would probably need to add progesterone to the sustanon, because I think its highly sensitive to aromatization, which the progesterone will prevent. DHEA would work too, even in a small ratio like 5:1.

And there is evidence that absorption is better in an ethanol medium, as opposed to oil-based. To be even more crazy, if I had access to DHT, I would try a topical DHT + Progesterone combo. I think it would be very potent.

 

[Estradiol]

Maybe? It's not like we should expect total regrowth from topical agents though. It was only about 10% regrowth with the topical testosterone. You would probably need to add progesterone to the sustanon, because I think its highly sensitive to aromatization, which the progesterone will prevent. DHEA would work too, even in a small ratio like 5:1.

And there is evidence that absorption is better in an ethanol medium, as opposed to oil-based. To be even more crazy, if I had access to DHT, I would try a topical DHT + Progesterone combo. I think it would be very potent.

You can try Proviron. It's so close to DHT. But I don't know about it's solubility. You would probably need Ethanol and DMSO too.

 

[mrchibbs]

You can try Proviron. It's so close to DHT. But I don't know about it's solubility. You would probably need Ethanol and DMSO too.

Thanks, Sadly I'm not such a great chemist

I would need to rely on a good product somewhere, already dissolved and ready to apply. For now I have a Progesterone to DHEA 5:1 solution, that I've just recently starting applying topically (had to shave my head fully to make it easier to apply though).

I don't expect major things from it on its own, but it's probably a very useful adjunct.

 

[Estradiol]

Thanks, Sadly I'm not such a great chemist

I would need to rely on a good product somewhere, already dissolved and ready to apply.

By the way I found an anti-fungal cream called Oxiconazole (similar to Ketoconazole).

AroER Tri-Screen Is a Biologically Relevant Assay for Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Modulating the Activity of Aromatase and/or the Estrogen Receptor

This study says it's an also aromatase inhibitor. I will try it ASAP, I have never tried an aromatase inhibitor on my scalp.

 

[mrchibbs]

By the way I found an anti-fungal cream called Oxiconazole (similar to Ketoconazole).

AroER Tri-Screen Is a Biologically Relevant Assay for Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals Modulating the Activity of Aromatase and/or the Estrogen Receptor

This study says it's an also aromatase inhibitor. I will try it ASAP, I have never tried an aromatase inhibitor on my scalp.

Woah that's interesting. I've always wondered about the mechanism of action of ketoconazole.

Do try it. The hair loss research Georgi linked recently showed great results from 2x weekly application of aromatase inhibitor. That's partly my motivation from using progesterone.
If oxiconazole can have similar effect, you'll be a very happy man. I would pick one and stick with it for several months.

 

[redsun]

You can try Proviron. It's so close to DHT. But I don't know about it's solubility. You would probably need Ethanol and DMSO too.

Proviron is actually weaker than your own DHT. To see the actual effects of DHT, you need to use bioidentical. You can say proviron is actually anti-DHT because it prevents actual DHT from binding. And what I have read is that it has such a high binding affinity for SHBG (much higher than actual DHT) that this displaces testosterone from SHBG, raising free T which is probably partly why it has good effects.

So people like to say DHT is pro-libido or pro-this but take weaker DHT instead of bioidentical. If you want to know for yourself if DHT is good, take bioidentical.

Also I think since androsterone (which haidut sells) converts straight into your own DHT (real strength DHT) you can also utilize that. Some people in the latest pages of the idealabs andro thread not getting good effects... Watery semen, loss of erection and libido... etc.

 

[Estradiol]

Woah that's interesting. I've always wondered about the mechanism of action of ketoconazole.

Do try it. The hair loss research Georgi linked recently showed great results from 2x weekly application of aromatase inhibitor. That's partly my motivation from using progesterone.
If oxiconazole can have similar effect, you'll be a very happy man. I would pick one and stick with it for several months.

Fulvestrant works little bit different.

It's an estrogen receptor down-regulator. Meaning that it will destroy estrogen receptors so estrogens can't bind or activate/agonize them.

It's also extremely expensive. Wish somebody rich try it :)

 

[Estradiol]

Proviron is actually weaker than your own DHT. To see the actual effects of DHT, you need to use bioidentical. You can say proviron is actually anti-DHT because it prevents actual DHT from binding. And what I have read is that it has such a high binding affinity for SHBG (much higher than actual DHT) that this displaces testosterone from SHBG, raising free T which is probably partly why it has good effects.

So people like to say DHT is pro-libido or pro-this but take weaker DHT instead of bioidentical. If you want to know for yourself if DHT is good, take bioidentical.

Also I think since androsterone (which haidut sells) converts straight into your own DHT (real strength DHT) you can also utilize that. Some people in the latest pages of the idealabs andro thread not getting good effects... Watery semen, loss of erection and libido... etc.

As far as I know pure/bioidentical DHT is illegal to get or something like that.

 

[mrchibbs]

Fulvestrant works little bit different.

It's an estrogen receptor down-regulator. Meaning that it will destroy estrogen receptors so estrogens can't bind or activate/agonize them.

It's also extremely expensive. Wish somebody rich try it :)

Oh really! I didn’t know that distinction.

Let me say you are very knowledgeable. It would be nice indeed if someone tried using fulvestrant to replicate that study.

 

[JDreamer]

Fulvestrant works little bit different.

It's an estrogen receptor down-regulator. Meaning that it will destroy estrogen receptors so estrogens can't bind or activate/agonize them.

It's also extremely expensive. Wish somebody rich try it :)

Is the enzyme associated with aromatase called CYP19? If so, I've seen cheaper "imidazole fungicides" in just a quick google search such as Clotrimazole 1% sold in Terrasil. Would that not be sufficient?

 

[Wilfrid]

New data suggest that the principal androgen made by the human adrenal is 11-ketotestosterone (11-KT), a rarely studied steroid.

Interesting.
And thyroid comes into play again...
INFLUENCE OF THYROID HORMONE ON HYDROCORTISONE PRODUCTION AND METABOLISM *

 

[Estradiol]

Is the enzyme associated with aromatase called CYP19? If so, I've seen cheaper "imidazole fungicides" in just a quick google search such as Clotrimazole 1% sold in Terrasil. Would that not be sufficient?

Yes, clotrimazole also inhibits aromatase.

 

[Aries]

What's even more interesting is that my serum estradiol would always correlate with my TSH and prolactin. Whenever e2 was high, my TSH would fall between 3-4, and prolactin would always be at the top of the range, and sometimes above. Whenever I took the ai, my TSH would drop to 1.5ish, and prolactin would drop by ~200 mIU/L.

I had zero concept of ray peat at this time (otherwise I wouldn't have been on exogenous testosterone ester, haha), but even then I noticed how the three would all change together.

I have had different experience with TSH and prolactin. I tested them together 4 times and had prolactin change over 300mIU/l without any correlation to TSH which was about 2 every time.

Btw, do you know from your personal experience or other labs posted in TRT forums what are the effects of exemestane/AIs on serum progesterone levels?