lanthanos

Bill, You might want to take a look at this thread http://hair-restoration-info.c...281097203#8281097203 It was made by a guy named HitzigSucks. At the time, Pat welcomed him to the web site with open arms. "HitzigSucks, Welcome to our community. When I saw your post name referencing the notorious Dr. Hitzig I knew you were going to have a horror story to share. His reputation truly precedes him and he has left many unhappy patients in his wake in my opinion." HitzigSucks name wasn't changed to HitzigPatient. You stated the terms of service have been in place for years. HitzigSucks hasn't posted in about 2.5 years. Have the terms of service changed since then? I am confused why the different responses to these two patients.

how did he get the gap? do some people lose hair naturally that way?

When did he work with Dr. Armani?

Does anyone here use Equaline generic minoxidil? I know there are at least two generic brands that I've seen, Kirkland from Costco and Equaline from Albertsons.

Armani is selling his LA practice. http://www.medhunters.com/job/919480.html

I posted the entire article on the foam, plus the abstracts showing absorption data, in this very forum.

different in one sense yes. in the sense that the vehicles are different. the foam vehicle is different than the liquid vehicle, even when the foam is liquefied. just look at your bottle of foam and look at the ingredients. pharmacia's own studies show that the liquid grows more hair than the foam, and the % of people who experience irritation on the foam is only about 2% less than the liquid. also, the original liquid studies showed an increase in hairs up until 4 months, then slowly decreasing hairs. My guess is that more old telogen hairs were shedding and going into anagen than new hairs were popping out. Noting that hair counts peaked at 4 months, the rogaine people specifically stopped their foam study at 4 months (as opposed to 48 weeks for the liquid) to show the maximum possible result, and it was still about 17 hairs/cm2 less than liquid at 4 months.

just so you guys know, if you read the article that showed better absorption of the foam....they liquefied the foam first before applying it.

Stingray, What does the Armani clinic estimate your percent growth was based on the pictures you provided them?

In my opinion Stingray you are a hero and inspiration. I think you've single handedly shut up a lot of questionable new posters asking for pics. If the Armani clinic hasn't contacted you in months, I'm sure they will now. If you can, please let us know how they treat you.

How can you expect to ask for photos supporting claims of poor Armani FUE growth, but at the same time not support your own claims of 70% growth of your personal FUE with your pictures? You can't have it both ways.

you should have his before photos

I do have a bottle of Dr. Lee's 12.5% minoxidil. I didn't get the 15% because it says it is made with 20% glycerol, which must be extremely gooey. Which formula do you use, the one from genhair, or Dr. Lee's, and what differences have you noticed when you switched from 5% to 15%? thanks for your help

sorry mmhce I don't get the joke in your post. You do or you don't use 15% minoxidil?

I posted a reply to this on page 3 of this sub forum on Jan 3rd answering this question. It is a poster session abstract cited in the original rogaine foam paper. THE JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY ABSTRACTS A1 124:4 APRIL 2005 Uptake of minoxidil from a new foam formulation devoid of propylene glycol to hamster ear hair follicles R Stehle,1 G Ewing,1 J Rundegren2 and B Kohut2 1 Pharmaceutical Sciences, Pfizer, Inc, Kalamazoo, MI and 2 Consumer Healthcare, Pfizer, Inc, Morris Plains, NJ Post-marketing studies show that the present topical minoxidil formulations are considered oily and in some cases there are reports of skin irritation. A major cause of the apparent inferior cosmetic properties and adverse effects of the current formulations on the skin is the rather high content of propylene glycol. Thus a more cosmetically acceptable minoxidil foam formulation, devoid of propylene glycol was developed. In order to test the availability of minoxidil to hair follicles hamster ears were treated with minoxidil 5% foam in comparison to the current minoxidil 5% solution (Rogaine?® Extra Strength), which served as a positive control. The foam was liquefied by gentle heating to 40C and then 20 ??l was withdrawn with a positive displacement syringe and spread on the ventral ear surfaces of a hamster, continuously and lightly anesthetized by controlled inhalation of isoflurane. After 1 to 2 hours, the animal was sacrificed and the ears removed and carefully dissected to isolate the sebaceous gland minoxidil content as an aqueous solution. Each sample was analyzed by HPLC with electrochemical detection against minoxidil as an external standard. After one hour of minoxidil treatment of the hamster ears the foam showed a sebaceous gland uptake of 5.9% of the total minoxidil, while the positive control showed an uptake of 2.0% of the total minoxidil. After 2 hours of treatment the uptake from the foam was 6.5% in one series of experiments and 4.1% in another series of experiments, while the uptake from the positive control was 1.2% only. Thus the delivered dose of minoxidil from the foam to the hamster ear sebaceous glands after one hour treatment was about three times higher than for the minoxidil 5% solution. After two hours of treatment the minoxidil delivery from the foam formulation increased to 3.4 to 5.4 higher than for the minoxidil 5% solution. It is concluded that the new minoxidil 5% foam formulation is delivering minoxidil more effectively to the sebaceous gland of the hamster ear than does the current minoxidil 5% solution.

so, no local doc consult, no pics of your own to post so others can follow your progress, just repeated posts asking for proof of pics of poor Armani FUE results, is all we're gonna see from you...

hey hairterminator, did you ever look into a local HT doc, it's been almost 3 months since you posted.

man that is brutal. what a story. I think...hair does matter..at a certain time, a certain age. women do care. certain women. and you never know which ones will and which ones won't. that's the fear.

lol Ask farrel to post his "lawsuit" against the mysterious thread deleters. I'd love to see his reply.

if I can add my 2 cents... I don't know what went on with the lawsuit, and not sure what my stance is on the removal of the thread, but it's really Pat's decision as the moderator of the board, and you either trust him or you don't. As he mentioned, his decision is influenced by legal things he can't say. it would be pretty stupid to invite another lawsuit by stating something he can't say. why go through all that bs again. He's also the one who pays the bill to defend these lawsuits to defend our right to state our opinions, so why cause him more grief, time lost, and money lost. I think the main point of all this is make sure to state your OPINION or EXPERIENCE. This is a crucial point. You can't be sued for stating an opinion. You can say "In my opinion, Armani is xyz..." You can still say your opinion about any doctor here, which is refreshing. You can't even make a post on Armani on HLH anymore (this is a fact). Just don't make claims as if they are fact if you don't know for sure that it is a fact, because that is libel, and will only be getting this site in trouble again, and there is no sense in causing more unnecessary lawsuits for this site. just say "in my opinion", or if you have personally experienced Armani, state your personal experience. if you know something for sure is true, only then you can state it as fact. This is not a special rule for hair loss web sites, it's true for any website forum (or tv or radio new for that matter).

yea this is a really interesting question and one I have seen asked before. This is my opinion on it. Hair is lost by the action of DHT. Minoxidil does something to grow hairs or convert them to anagen phase. These are hairs that were previously miniaturized by DHT. Once they are returned by minoxidil, and the DHT is lowered because you are now on propecia, then they should be more likely to stay growing. but it confuses me, because by this logic, why is it that hair doesn't just regrow with propecia itself if DHT was what was stopping the hair from growing. Sadly I don't think there ever has been or will be a study on this since propecia is made by Merck and rogaine is made by Pfizer.

yea I tried regular spectral DNC and it also is yellow, turns your scalp yellow, and stains anything it touches yellow, including pillow cases and shirts. it also makes your hair really sticky. the DNC-L I believe is a lotion (L for lotion). It has 5% minoxidil, plus other things such as Aminexil SP94, which is something developed by L'Oreal that is supposed to be another proven hair loss preventive by preventing root stiffening, but I've never heard anything about FDA approval of Aminexil SP94 for hair loss. It also contains apple procyanidins, hops, ivy, capsicum, adenosine, retinol, arginine, olive extrac, saw palmetto extract, and flax seed extract. everything but the kitchen sink, kind of like the Revita shampoo.

I went to the Los Angeles Superior Court Online Services Page at https://www.lasuperiorcourt.or...CivilIndex/index.asp HLH is based in Santa Monica, which is in Los Angeles County. First I had to register. Then I did a "Party Name Search" for Hairlosshelp, Inc. It cost me $5. I found only 1 record of any case involving Hairlosshelp, Inc. This was a suit against IHTI (John Cole) filed on 2/23/2007 in Small Claims at the Santa Monica Courthouse. I attached a screen capture of the search result. Since there are no other lawsuits returned by a party name search for Hairlosshelp, Inc., this would suggest no lawsuit has been filed against the evil doers who deleted his threads. Anyone else agree? Also, you don't have to take my word for it. You can follow the exact same steps I did.

I went to the Los Angeles Superior Court Online Services Page at https://www.lasuperiorcourt.or...CivilIndex/index.asp HLH is based in Santa Monica, which is in Los Angeles County. First I had to register. Then I did a "Party Name Search" for Hairlosshelp, Inc. It cost me $5. I found only 1 record of any case involving Hairlosshelp, Inc. This was a suit against IHTI (John Cole) filed on 2/23/2007 in Small Claims at the Santa Monica Courthouse. I attached a screen capture of the search result. Since there are no other lawsuits returned by a party name search for Hairlosshelp, Inc., this would suggest no lawsuit has been filed against the evil doers who deleted his threads. Anyone else agree? Also, you don't have to take my word for it. You can follow the exact same steps I did.

even the format is going down the tubes since he disabled the blog utility and keeps giving excuses about when it will be back up (my guess is never, wonder why)