Okay, just by the language you're using, I can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. I know you think you can bullshit it, but you need to understand it's not working. I am HIGHLY AWARE you have not taken a statistics class. And I do mean HIGHLY AWARE. First off, those percentages aren't what you think they mean, aren't what's of interest, and are not used in any statistical test to determine a drug's effect. "Comparably significant" is a completely useless term that you just made up. "the number with sides in the control group was over half that in the drug group" is not a statistical test of any kind, is not used to determine the null hypothesis. It's pubtrash. No further comment is needed. If you want to contradict the FDA's conclusion (I suggest reading it before commenting on it), you're going to have to start by taking a statistics class. Learn what the null hypothesis is (what's being investigated) Learn what ANOVA is (one of the many statistical test used to determine the null hypothesis.) So far, you've just proven to be another idiot on the Internet talking out of his ass.
Okay, I see you are skimming for things to "prove" your point, but you have to read and also understand the study. There is so much wrong this shit. This is typical hairloss forum brospeak, I don't feel like going over all of it. I'll just debunk the last thing you said.
"not one had PFS or permanent sides."
http://i.imgur.com/qKSEtK5.png
"Similarly in all the other major studies also."
Not one major study says this. Some advice, don't skim a paper and link it here to "prove" yourself right. It'll just further you're embarrassment.