Topical Dutasteride = no systemic absorbtion??

[MattFord]

It seems that there is a lot of promising litterature. Maybe a less harmful alt than finasteride? For us vain guys that care about hair.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

I would apply progesterone to the scalp, and hydrogenated coconut oil when it's dry.

 

[MyUsernameHere]

Overcoming barriers by local drug delivery with liposomes

Localized or topical administration of drugs may be considered as a potential approach for overcoming the problems caused by the various biological ba…

www.sciencedirect.com

**** all that. I'm telling you from experience - it makes little difference. But most have to learn on their own skin, and so it is...

 

[MitchMitchell]

Terrible logic. White blood cells go up when you have an infection, so would limiting your white blood cells be beneficial to infection problems? This is also the same line of logic that was used in the war against cholesterol.

Topical Dutasteride will absorb systemically. Most things topically applied will. It will have higher concentrations in the area applied, but will certainly go systemic over time. Messing with any of the 5AR inhibitors is a bad idea.

Drug companies have even been telling you that Dutasteride will absorb systemically since the very first commercials for the product-



"Women should not take, OR EVEN HANDLE Avodart due to a risk of a specific birth defect." Pretty clear they are warning about systemic absorption from even brief exposure topically.

It's somewhat crazy that people come to a forum named after Ray Peat, and on their very first post, talk about doing something that Ray would be very specifically against because of the danger, especially for a relatively trivial problem like hair loss.

Peat just talked about his ideas on DHT in a livestream last week (starting around the 50 minute mark)-

Peat specifically says DHT is anti-inflammatory at 57:30.

Anyway, why mess around with Dutasteride? Haidut just posted a study that topical DHT can promote hair growth.

Topical DHT therapy promotes hair growth – To Extract Knowledge from Matter

lmao @haidut

the sentence says

when the DHT concentration decreased from 10-6 mol/L to 10-7 mol/L, the HFs grew much better than in the presence of higher DHT concentrations.

yet he chose to highlight the following

In fact, the results suggest that an appropriate level of DHT is required for normal androgen-sensitive HF growth. Once the DHT concentration decreased from 10-7 mol/L to 10-8 mol/L, the HF growth rate showed no significant difference from that in the control group, which explains why beard growth is weaker in castrated males.

it’s as if we had quite the concept right here. Any hormone in excess is inferior than being in the optimal part of the range. Not too high, not too low. Ditto for estradiol. It seems to be VERY hard to understand for a lot of people who treat hormones like religion and keep saying DHT GOOD ESTROGEN BAD. This is why Finasteride works and no one on this forum has ever outperformed guys on 5ARi’s on Reddit/tressless.

Haidut is bald. So.

 

[Pablo Cruise]

I quoted studies. I don't assume. I do imagine there could be some systemic absorption if a lot is applied and of high concentration. One study used a 0.25% in a basic or crude liposomal formula and claimed no to minimal absorption. I have another study that states a 1% gel formula with the same results. I use what I preach here. I have not done DHT blood levels but I am not aware of any absorption. This may make a difference in what you are doing, use silicone PEG10 and a silquioxones.
They help with spreading and keeping drug molecules localized by bonding to the API. By the way I use an Ultrasonic mixer at 70 degrees for certain stages.

 

[tankasnowgod]

This is why Finasteride works and no one on this forum has ever outperformed guys on 5ARi’s on Reddit/tressless.

Haidut is bald. So.

Finasteride isn't even sold to "regrow hair." It's marketed to "slow down hair loss."

Also, in case you haven't noticed, this isn't a hairloss forum.

You can also quibble about what Haidut highlighted or didn't. Fact of the matter is, it's a study that re-grew hair applying low dose DHT topically.

At day 12, hair regeneration was obvious in the low-dose DHT (10-7 mol/L) group compared with the control group, while the skin of mice in the high-dose DHT (10-6 mol/L) group remained pink at this time point. HE staining (Figure 3) indicated that more hair shafts were observed in the low-dose DHT (10-7 mol/L) group than in the other groups. These results suggest that the effects of DHT on HF growth depend on its concentration: the entry of HFs into the anagen phase in C57BL/6 mice is induced by 10-7 mol/L DHT but inhibited by 10-6 mol/L DHT.

 

[Pablo Cruise]

Finasteride isn't even sold to "regrow hair." It's marketed to "slow down hair loss."

Also, in case you haven't noticed, this isn't a hairloss forum.

You can also quibble about what Haidut highlighted or didn't. Fact of the matter is, it's a study that re-grew hair applying low dose DHT topically.

YOU seem to have an edge to your comments....sound like an angry guy. BTW I did not start the "hairloss forum" conversation but thanks anyway.

 

[tankasnowgod]

YOU seem to have an edge to your comments....sound like an angry guy. BTW I did not start the "hairloss forum" conversation but thanks anyway.

What in anything I said makes you think I'm an "Angry Guy?" Not one single thing I said was out of anger.

I also wasn't replying to you. The reason I mention this is "not a hairloss forum" is that Mitch Mitchell was claiming that people on forums dedicated to hairloss regrow hair faster than people on the Ray Peat forum. Even if true, that's not the stated goal of this forum. It's like claiming guys on the Rubik's Cube Forum can solve a Rubik's Cube Faster than the guys on the BMW talk forum. What does one have to do with the other?

And even if I am angry and my comments have an "edge," does that change the fact that Finasteride is only marketed to slow down hairloss? Not regrow hair?

Does that change the fact that the study Haidut originally posted regrew hair using topical DHT?

You can call me angry, but I notice you didn't call me wrong.

And since you thanked me...... um, your welcome, I guess.

 

[tankasnowgod]

personally, it seems passive aggressive and remarkably condescending, given your audience. but hey, different strokes.

Lol, I wasn't aware I was on a TV show here. Nor do I treat this forum like a social media account. I am not trying to build any sort of audience.

I don't think I ever said there weren't underlying issues to hairloss. Just that I wouldn't take dangerous drugs like finasteride or dutasteride to change the cosmetic part of the problem, while inviting a whole host of other issues, probably more serious than whatever caused hairloss in the first place.

 

[Archon]

Topical dut 2020 vitro study

In Vitro Performance of Dutasteride-Nanostructured Lipid Carriers Coated with Lauric Acid-Chitosan Oligomer for Dermal Delivery

Dutasteride, licensed as an oral medicine for the treatment of benign prostatic hypoplasia, has been investigated as a treatment for androgenic alopecia. In this study, the potential for dustasteride to be delivered topically in order to reduce systemic exposure, irritation of the skin, and also...

www.mdpi.com

topical dut patent

WO2019012353A1 - Topical compositions of dutasteride - Google Patents

The present invention relates to a composition for topical application for preventing hair loss, androgenic alopecia (AA) and stimulating hair growth having dutasteride. The composition for topical application for preventing hair loss and stimulating hair growth according to the present...

patents.google.com

The present invention has been made to solve the above problems of the prior art, and an object of the present inv ention is to provide a composition of dutasteride for topical application for preventing hair loss and stimulating hair growth, which has the following advantages

1. It provides the effects of preventing hair loss and stimulating hair growth that are equal to or higher than that of conventional treatment agents (oral dutasteride & finasteride) even though the amount of dutasteride used is less than one half, more preferably less than two fifth that of the conventional treatment agents (oral dutasteride and finasteride).

2. There are almost no systemic side effects of the conventional treatment agents (oral dutasteride and finasteride).

3. It is possible to effectively prevent hair loss from the beginning of the treatment due to a rapid onset of the effect; and

4. It provides almost 100% effect to patients with hair loss, unlike the conventional prescription (oral dutasteride and finasteride) that provides about 70% effect. OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION

The object of the present invention is to provide a composition for topical application for preventing hair loss and stimulating hair growth, containing dutasteride or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.”

I'm in your same situation. Literally have to run against time because this is my last chance to save hair. I'm even considering oral finasteride because i wonder if i can even get my hands on topical dutasteride. What do you think of minoxidil? Is it something less dangerous? I would start using it if so, i have dormant follicles and my rate of regrowth is really getting lower than the rate of shedding

I would apply progesterone to the scalp, and hydrogenated coconut oil when it's dry.

why coconut oil?

Finasteride isn't even sold to "regrow hair." It's marketed to "slow down hair loss."

Also, in case you haven't noticed, this isn't a hairloss forum.

You can also quibble about what Haidut highlighted or didn't. Fact of the matter is, it's a study that re-grew hair applying low dose DHT topically.

No one seems to address the fact that human scalp hair follicles are a loooong leap from mice skin hair follicles. There's a thing called DHT sensitivity, it's just different, like body hair is different from scalp hair.

 

[equipoise]

There is no help with balding imho, I can't reverse balding, but then again I won't try half of the stuff that's recommended and subsequently nuke my manlyhood and wellbeing. Thanks, but no thanks. I've tried Progesterone (idealabs) and it had a great effect on my hair quality but didn't stop my hairline receding ever so slowly. Started out 4 years ago and is not stopping. All males in my family (both mother's and father's side) were bald by 25.
No point in trying really. It seems that everything else can be in order (my strength, spatial memory, coordination, reflexes, muscle building, libido), yet still lose hair.

 

[Sweet Meat]

I don't think I ever said there weren't underlying issues to hairloss. Just that I wouldn't take dangerous drugs like finasteride or dutasteride to change the cosmetic part of the problem, while inviting a whole host of other issues, probably more serious than whatever caused hairloss in the first place.

you came to the hair loss section and managed to tell everyone here that their problems were;

"relatively trivial problem like hair loss."
"that baldness is basically a minor problem" "
seeing as baldness is basically a cosmetic problem"

in only 2 posts, despite no one asking for an opinion or indeed an opinion being at all relevant to the topic at hand.

at best that's clumsy, but again since several people have now noted the same condescending tone from you, i'm just going to assume it's compulsive passive aggression on your part, like i said.

you're not a doctor or chemist (no offence?) so i doubt people need your opinion on how dangerous fda drugs could be, if they've already done their own due diligence.

Lol, I wasn't aware I was on a TV show here. Nor do I treat this forum like a social media account. I am not trying to build any sort of audience.

please, feel free to stop talking to me. i doubt the standard is going to improve at all, given you've been here for over seven years and still lack the tact or awareness to realize a forum is an audience.

 

[tankasnowgod]

you came to the hair loss section and managed to tell everyone here that their problems were;

"relatively trivial problem like hair loss."
"that baldness is basically a minor problem" "
seeing as baldness is basically a cosmetic problem"

in only 2 posts, despite no one asking for an opinion or indeed an opinion being at all relevant to the topic at hand.

at best that's clumsy, but again since several people have now noted the same condescending tone from you, i'm just going to assume it's compulsive passive aggression on your part, like i said.

you're not a doctor or chemist (no offence?) so i doubt people need your opinion on how dangerous fda drugs could be, if they've already done their own due diligence.



please, feel free to stop talking to me. i doubt the standard is going to improve at all, given you've been here for over seven years and still lack the tact or awareness to realize a forum is an audience.

Ridiculous. You are a brand new user with only 16 posts on this forum.

First off, there is no "Hair Loss Section" to this forum. It's a topic that get's talked about from time to time.

In fact, the title of this thread doesn't even mention hairloss. It's asking about systemic effects of topical dutasteride. Clearly, topical dutasteride can and does have systemic effects. The very first Avodart commercials warned about this very thing. The one study posted about topical dutasteride also showed lower levels of DHT in a small group of men, both in the median and the mean.

I stand by what I said. Baldness IS a cosmetic problem. And for men especially, it's basically a minor one. You can name several bald male celebrities that have had a lot of success, even who are considered handsome and charismatic. You can find that in pretty much any sort of business, if you look. I never disputed that there can be underlying health issues that can and should be addressed. But 5AR inhibitors will likely only make underlying problem worse. I never see people thinking of taking finasteride or dutasteride talking about their DHT blood tests, and noting how they are out of the lab range high, or high/normal. I suggested some ideas, like progesterone, thyroid and red light, that may treat or even reverse hairlosss, none with the 5AR inhibitor side effects, and all of which will have a positive systemic affect on the organism.

Lastly, I will respond to whatever post I want. Since you are a new member, I will let you know there is a handy "ignore" feature on this forum. Please feel free to use it.

 

[tankasnowgod]

No one seems to address the fact that human scalp hair follicles are a loooong leap from mice skin hair follicles. There's a thing called DHT sensitivity, it's just different, like body hair is different from scalp hair.

Did you read the study? It was done on human Hair Follicles grafted onto mice.

 

[Sweet Meat]

Ridiculous. You are a brand new user with only 16 posts on this forum.

First off, there is no "Hair Loss Section" to this forum. It's a topic that get's talked about from time to time.

ha. 18/20 of the threads on the front page of this "hair and nails section" are specifically about hair loss. i'll wager that % stays relatively consistent as the pages turn.

i guess we have very different opinions on what "from time to time" actually means lol

Since you are a new member, I will let you know there is a handy "ignore" feature on this forum. Please feel free to use it.

cheers ^_^

 

[tankasnowgod]

ha. 18/20 of the threads on the front page of this "hair and nails section" are specifically about hair loss. i'll wager that % stays relatively consistent as the pages turn.

i guess we have very different opinions on what "from time to time" actually means lol

Wow, you're saying you did a search for hair related topics on this forum, and some threads regarding hair loss came up? Will the wonders of search engines never cease?

If you go to the Main Page of this forum, not logged in, and look at the main topics, you will see that only 2 of the first 20 topics involve hairloss, if you include this one. So yeah, I would say that this idea comes up on the forum "from time to time" is pretty accurate. If you only joined this forum a few weeks ago and only looked at or engaged with threads involving hair loss, I can see how your perspective about this forum might be skewed.

 

[Sweet Meat]

Wow, you're saying

no, you said that. i never did a search for anything...

i said that the front page of this sub forum is 90% hair related, and thus you appear as condescending, passive aggressive and clumsy when you join related conversations and parrot how much of a non-issue you believe hair loss to be

it's often difficult to determine whether that level of social obliviousness is caused by ignorance or arrogance when online, but given the fact that you're still trying to justify your position, i'll stick to my initial impression :P

 

[tankasnowgod]

no, you said that. i never did a search for anything...

Yes, you totally did. You clicked on the "Hair & Nails" tag. That's doing a search, right there. Even if you want to call that a "section," it's not strictly about hairloss. There is no hairloss section on this forum.

When I said that baldness is a topic that comes up from time to time on this forum, I was referring to the Ray Peat Forum as a whole. And based on the years that I've been here, it is a topic that comes up occasionally. I does not dominate the front page, and there are months when a hairloss topic never even makes it there or comes up. It's simply not a major topic here, more of a niche one. If you stick around for a few months, you might notice that.

 

[Sweet Meat]

Yes, you totally did. You clicked on the "Hair & Nails" tag. That's doing a search, right there. Even if you want to call that a "section," it's not strictly about hairloss. There is no hairloss section on this forum.

how am i searching for something if i click on a specific topic? lol, you really are a creature of semantics.

if i order a meal, am i still deciding on what to eat?

When I said that baldness is a topic that comes up from time to time on this forum, I was referring to the Ray Peat Forum as a whole.

all i'm saying is, hair loss makes up 90% of the FRONT PAGE of this "HAIR AND NAILS" sub forum, so i'd assume it's a fairly dominant topic, at least compared to nails.

 

[MyUsernameHere]

There is no help with balding imho, I can't reverse balding, but then again I won't try half of the stuff that's recommended and subsequently nuke my manlyhood and wellbeing. Thanks, but no thanks. I've tried Progesterone (idealabs) and it had a great effect on my hair quality but didn't stop my hairline receding ever so slowly. Started out 4 years ago and is not stopping. All males in my family (both mother's and father's side) were bald by 25.
No point in trying really. It seems that everything else can be in order (my strength, spatial memory, coordination, reflexes, muscle building, libido), yet still lose hair.

My experience is that having hair requires suffering, and there is no way around that. There is literally not a single substance that worked even remotely that didn't cause me side effects or suffering of some sort. If you have baldness in your cards, this is the MO of your body. You have to introduce a significant enough amount of a powerful chemical to disrupt this effect, and the required dose always, invariably, **** up some other system.

I've been experimenting with compounds for 7 years and have not found a single thing that worked that I could tolerate in the long run. I'm not saying that such a compound doesn't perhaps exist, but I haven't found it, and I must've tried several hundred. It seems that if you want to keep your hair with the methods presently available, you must accept some kind of compromise to your quality of life, whether you're aware of it or not.