| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free |
» Don’t use the term “DHT blocker”. It’s ambiguous and unscientific. You
» don’t see it used in medical studies or textbooks.
Who gives a shit if it’s ambiguous and unscientific. The point of this thread is that Nizoral has some influence on DHT. This isn’t a medical journal. Most people browsing this site don’t want to get that scientific. If they can slather something on their head that regrows hair with no negative side effects, that is all that matters.
» » Don’t use the term “DHT blocker”. It’s ambiguous and unscientific. You
» » don’t see it used in medical studies or textbooks.
»
» Who gives a shit if it’s ambiguous and unscientific. The point of this
» thread is that Nizoral has some influence on DHT. This isn’t a medical
» journal. Most people browsing this site don’t want to get that
» scientific. If they can slather something on their head that regrows hair
» with no negative side effects, that is all that matters.
OH REALLY?? Then why was there a spirited back-and-forth even RIGHT HERE IN THIS VERY SAME THREAD about the meanings of these terms and expressions? If you want to bring the discussion down to a “Me Tarzan you Jane” level, that’s your business, but I want people to speak with clarity and precision, so I don’t have to GUESS what the hell they’re talking about.
Bryan
» OH REALLY?? Then why was there a spirited back-and-forth even RIGHT HERE
» IN THIS VERY SAME THREAD about the meanings of these terms and
» expressions?
The intent of this thread was to inform that Nizoral does have an effect on DHT. Someone, seemingly non-technical, made a statement that it had no effect on DHT. The exact mechanism, blocking receptors etc, wasn’t really in the scope. I guess I shouldn’t have said “block”. I was using that as a generic, non-scientific term.
» » OH REALLY?? Then why was there a spirited back-and-forth even RIGHT
» HERE
» » IN THIS VERY SAME THREAD about the meanings of these terms and
» » expressions?
»
» The intent of this thread was to inform that Nizoral does have an effect
» on DHT. Someone, seemingly non-technical, made a statement that it had no
» effect on DHT. The exact mechanism, blocking receptors etc, wasn’t really
» in the scope. I guess I shouldn’t have said “block”. I was using that as
» a generic, non-scientific term.
i agree with chia
when have you ever seen someone use the term androgen receptor blocker…thats ridiculous
if we were scientists or physicians submitting a technical paper to a Journal it would be different
I can assure you that there are a lot of technical terms used in scientific papers that are not used here, we are for the most part laymen, not doctors, here
you know exactly what we are talking about when we say DHT blocker, its androgren receptors on the prostate or the base of the hair follicle being blocked
as opposed to 5 AR inhibitor, which blocks conversion of testosterone to DHT
» i agree with chia
»
» when have you ever seen someone use the term androgen receptor
» blocker…thats ridiculous
Like ALL THE TIME in textbooks and medical journals studies. That term is used synonymously with the word “antiandrogen”.
» if we were scientists or physicians submitting a technical paper to a
» Journal it would be different
»
» I can assure you that there are a lot of technical terms used in
» scientific papers that are not used here, we are for the most part laymen,
» not doctors, here
Yes, but that’s not the point. The point is that you can’t even communicate properly and avoid ambiguity if you keep using these stupid hairloss-forum expressions like “DHT blocker”.
» you know exactly what we are talking about when we say DHT blocker, its
» androgren receptors on the prostate or the base of the hair follicle being
» blocked
»
» as opposed to 5 AR inhibitor, which blocks conversion of testosterone to
» DHT
Bullshit! I have seen that term used in BOTH situations, where a poster on one hand was referring to 5a-reductase inhibitors (as I found out later by either asking him, or by his later postings), and on the other hand by posters who used it in reference to androgen receptor blockers (antiandrogens).
BE PROFESSIONAL, and use the proper scientific term. Avoid ambiguity.
» » i agree with chia
» »
» » when have you ever seen someone use the term androgen receptor
» » blocker…thats ridiculous
»
» Like ALL THE TIME in textbooks and medical journals studies. That term is
» used synonymously with the word “antiandrogen”.
»
» » if we were scientists or physicians submitting a technical paper to a
» » Journal it would be different
» »
» » I can assure you that there are a lot of technical terms used in
» » scientific papers that are not used here, we are for the most part
» laymen,
» » not doctors, here
»
» Yes, but that’s not the point. The point is that you can’t even
» communicate properly and avoid ambiguity if you keep using these stupid
» hairloss-forum expressions like “DHT blocker”.
»
» » you know exactly what we are talking about when we say DHT blocker, its
» » androgren receptors on the prostate or the base of the hair follicle
» being
» » blocked
» »
» » as opposed to 5 AR inhibitor, which blocks conversion of testosterone
» to
» » DHT
»
» Bullshit! I have seen that term used in BOTH situations, where a poster
» on one hand was referring to 5a-reductase inhibitors (as I found out later
» by either asking him, or by his later postings), and on the other hand by
» posters who used it in reference to androgen receptor blockers
» (antiandrogens).
»
» BE PROFESSIONAL, and use the proper scientific term. Avoid ambiguity.
get a life
i dont see anyone complaining about this, other than you,
you are not the board posting, cop. You dont decide the manner in which we post, or the terminology we use
if you cannot understand what a poster is referring to, thats your problem
» get a life
»
» i dont see anyone complaining about this, other than you,
» you are not the board posting, cop. You dont decide the manner
» in which we post, or the terminology we use
That’s correct, but I damned sure will express my opinion of the vulgar, sloppy, uneducated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms on this forum.
» » get a life
» »
» » i dont see anyone complaining about this, other than you,
» » you are not the board posting, cop. You dont decide the manner
» » in which we post, or the terminology we use
»
» That’s correct, but I damned sure will express my opinion of the vulgar,
» sloppy, uneducated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms on this forum.
google DHT blockers
you will find it on thousands of websites
perhaps if you are bored, you can send each of them a nasty email, chastising them for their ignorant misinformed, thoughtless butchering of medical terminology
it could be your calling in life
as to how we feel about your opinion on this matter, all i have to say is
YAWN:-P 
» I damned sure will express my opinion of the vulgar,
» sloppy, uneducated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms on this forum.
As opposed to the educated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms?
Here is a term for you: douche bag. Allow me use it in an uneducated and vulgar manner: You are a douche bag. 
Just kidding man.
This Thread is labeled NIZORAL,
nizoral is the topical version of the drug ketoconazole.
Bryan Thanks for helping clarify this thread 
The reason it makes a big difference is becuase we are disucssuing Nizoral as a topical and why and how it works and its mode of action.
And it is by suppressing the androgen receptor, not by being a system anti androgen or DHT bloker as Bryan Mentioned
Also GC691 i don’t think you should comment on topical nizoral if you haven’t read the latest japanease study becuase you are blatantly wrong.
» And also has a non androgenetcic growth promoting ability that has yet to
» be scientifically understood.
»
Nope. Nizoral/Keto impact on androgens is very clearly understood. I have read many, many papers on this. It is simply a CYP450 inhibitor
Yes here you are wrong as we were talking about topical not internal.
And to date it seems their are at least 2 maybe 3 different modes of action of topical nizoral
Androgen receptor blocker ( see Japan study)
Some other non androgenetic growth stimulation mode (See Japan study)
By stopping Malasaezum forfora (dandruff) inflammatory response on hair
EBSCOhost Login
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/adis/derm/2006/00000007/00000004/art00008
So basically to answer the original statement as clearly as possible.
NO NO NO nizoral is not a DHT blocker 
» » I damned sure will express my opinion of the vulgar,
» » sloppy, uneducated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms on this
» forum.
»
» As opposed to the educated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms?
»
» Here is a term for you: douche bag. Allow me use it in an uneducated and
» vulgar manner: You are a douche bag. Just kidding man.
Although it pains me, we do need to be precise on the mechanisms at play.
Just becuase there are thousands of websites that refer to DHT Blockers, or that claim you can grow a 20-inch penis, or that you can eat Krispy Kreame and lose weight at the same time, doesn’t make it true.
» This Thread is labeled NIZORAL,
»
» nizoral is the topical version of the drug ketoconazole.
»
» Bryan Thanks for helping clarify this thread
»
» The reason it makes a big difference is becuase we are disucssuing Nizoral
» as a topical and why and how it works and its mode of action.
»
» And it is by suppressing the androgen receptor, not by being a system anti
» androgen or DHT bloker as Bryan Mentioned
»
» Also GC691 i don’t think you should comment on topical nizoral if you
» haven’t read the latest japanease study becuase you are blatantly wrong.
»
» » And also has a non androgenetcic growth promoting ability that has yet
» to
» » be scientifically understood.
» »
» Nope. Nizoral/Keto impact on androgens is very clearly understood. I have
» read many, many papers on this. It is simply a CYP450 inhibitor
»
»
» Yes here you are wrong as we were talking about topical not internal.
»
» And to date it seems their are at least 2 maybe 3 different modes of
» action of topical nizoral
»
» 1) Androgen receptor blocker ( see Japan study)
»
» 2) Some other non androgenetic growth stimulation mode (See Japan study)
»
» 3) By stopping Malasaezum forfora (dandruff) inflammatory response on
» hair
» EBSCOhost Login
»
» http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/adis/derm/2006/00000007/00000004/art00008
… here is the net. I am not going to type all my points again. Here is the summary.
The japanese paper is “lite-science”; you should read all the keto/nizoral research before attempting to argue with me on this subject
The hair stimulant reference that they cite is laughable and almost certainly nothing to do with fighting MPB
You are confused about topical and systemic. Topical is a mode of application that we use to try to localize the impact of a potentially dangerous drug in our fight against MPB. Topical does not mean that the drug is not absorbed, it has to be in order to work. It does mean that we are trying to limit the systemic increase of the the drug concentration. The reason topicals work is that the chemical pathways act out locally on/in the hair cells, i.e. INTERNALLY. This is another area where we need clarity on our language.
Modes of action. Maybe their is some receptor down-regulation; I think the paper is not detailed enough. The hair stimulant refernce is crap. Inflammatory impact of the immune response is quite interesting; I suggest you go read Scientific American from about 3 months ago on this subject.
Go read the WHO paper “Endocrine Disruptors”; it will give you some good basic material on the major mechanism of ketoconazole on the hormone system.
Don’t attack me with one poor piece of research and loose language. Go and do you homework.
I will not comment on you crappy posts again until you get educated and stop regurgitating nonsense. I advise others to do likewise.
gc.
» … here is the net. I am not going to type all my points again. Here is
» the summary.
»
» 1. The japanese paper is “lite-science”; you should read all the
» keto/nizoral research before attempting to argue with me on this subject
»
» 2. The hair stimulant reference that they cite is laughable and almost
» certainly nothing to do with fighting MPB
»
» 3. You are confused about topical and systemic. Topical is a mode of
» application that we use to try to localize the impact of a potentially
» dangerous drug in our fight against MPB. Topical does not mean that the
» drug is not absorbed, it has to be in order to work. It does mean that we
» are trying to limit the systemic increase of the the drug concentration.
» The reason topicals work is that the chemical pathways act out locally
» on/in the hair cells, i.e. INTERNALLY. This is another area where we need
» clarity on our language.
»
» 4. Modes of action. Maybe their is some receptor down-regulation; I think
» the paper is not detailed enough. The hair stimulant refernce is crap.
» Inflammatory impact of the immune response is quite interesting; I suggest
» you go read Scientific American from about 3 months ago on this subject.
»
» 5. Go read the WHO paper “Endocrine Disruptors”; it will give you some
» good basic material on the major mechanism of ketoconazole on the hormone
» system.
»
» 6. Don’t attack me with one poor piece of research and loose language. Go
» and do you homework.
»
» 7. I will not comment on you crappy posts again until you get educated and
» stop regurgitating nonsense. I advise others to do likewise.
»
» gc.
In response to my own post, there does appear to be evidence that in addition to impacting hormone pathways, Ketoconazole does bind to a wide variety of cell receptors…
Ketoconazole binds to the human androgen receptor.Eil C.
Department of Internal Medicine, Naval Hospital, Bethesda, Maryland.
Ketoconazole, an imidazole anti-fungal agent, has often produced features of androgen deficiency including decreased libido, gynecomastia, impotence, oligospermia, and decreased testosterone levels, in men being treated for chronic mycotic infections. Based on these potent effects on gonadal function in vivo as well as previous work in vitro demonstrating affinity of ketoconazole for receptor proteins for glucocorticoids and 1,25(OH)2 vitamin D3 and for sex steroid binding globulin (SSBG), the binding of ketoconazole to human androgen receptors (AR) in vitro was also examined. Ketoconazole competition with [3H]methyltrienolone (R1881) for androgen binding sites in dispersed, intact cultured human skin fibroblasts was determined at 22 degrees C. Fifty percent displacement of [3H]R1881 binding to AR was achieved by 6.4 +/- 1.8 (SE) x 10(-5) M ketoconazole. Additional binding studies performed with ketoconazole in the presence of increasing amounts of [3H]R1881 showed that the interaction of ketoconazole with AR was competitive when the data were analyzed by the Scatchard method. It should be noted, however, that the dose of ketoconazole required for 50% occupancy of the androgen receptor is not likely to be achieved in vivo, at least in plasma. Finally, androgen binding studies performed with other imidazoles, such as clotrimazole, miconazole, and fluconozole, revealed that in this class of compounds only ketoconazole appears to interact with the androgen receptor. Ketoconazole appears to be the first example of a non-steroidal compound which binds competitively to both SSBG and multiple steroid hormone receptors, suggesting that the ligand binding sites of these proteins share some features in common.
PMID: 1526623 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
» » … here is the net. I am not going to type all my points again. Here is
» » the summary.
» »
» » 1. The japanese paper is “lite-science”; you should read all the
» » keto/nizoral research before attempting to argue with me on this
» subject
» »
» » 2. The hair stimulant reference that they cite is laughable and almost
» » certainly nothing to do with fighting MPB
» »
» » 3. You are confused about topical and systemic. Topical is a mode of
» » application that we use to try to localize the impact of a potentially
» » dangerous drug in our fight against MPB. Topical does not mean that the
» » drug is not absorbed, it has to be in order to work. It does mean that
» we
» » are trying to limit the systemic increase of the the drug
» concentration.
» » The reason topicals work is that the chemical pathways act out locally
» » on/in the hair cells, i.e. INTERNALLY. This is another area where we
» need
» » clarity on our language.
» »
» » 4. Modes of action. Maybe their is some receptor down-regulation; I
» think
» » the paper is not detailed enough. The hair stimulant refernce is crap.
» » Inflammatory impact of the immune response is quite interesting; I
» suggest
» » you go read Scientific American from about 3 months ago on this subject.
»
» »
» » 5. Go read the WHO paper “Endocrine Disruptors”; it will give you some
» » good basic material on the major mechanism of ketoconazole on the
» hormone
» » system.
» »
» » 6. Don’t attack me with one poor piece of research and loose language.
» Go
» » and do you homework.
» »
» » 7. I will not comment on you crappy posts again until you get educated
» and
» » stop regurgitating nonsense. I advise others to do likewise.
» »
» » gc.
»
» In response to my own post, there does appear to be evidence that in
» addition to impacting hormone pathways, Ketoconazole does bind to a wide
» variety of cell receptors…
»
» Ketoconazole binds to the human androgen receptor.Eil C.
» Department of Internal Medicine, Naval Hospital, Bethesda, Maryland.
»
» Ketoconazole, an imidazole anti-fungal agent, has often produced features
» of androgen deficiency including decreased libido, gynecomastia,
» impotence, oligospermia, and decreased testosterone levels, in men being
» treated for chronic mycotic infections. Based on these potent effects on
» gonadal function in vivo as well as previous work in vitro demonstrating
» affinity of ketoconazole for receptor proteins for glucocorticoids and
» 1,25(OH)2 vitamin D3 and for sex steroid binding globulin (SSBG), the
» binding of ketoconazole to human androgen receptors (AR) in vitro was also
» examined. Ketoconazole competition with [3H]methyltrienolone (R1881) for
» androgen binding sites in dispersed, intact cultured human skin
» fibroblasts was determined at 22 degrees C. Fifty percent displacement of
» [3H]R1881 binding to AR was achieved by 6.4 +/- 1.8 (SE) x 10(-5) M
» ketoconazole. Additional binding studies performed with ketoconazole in
» the presence of increasing amounts of [3H]R1881 showed that the
» interaction of ketoconazole with AR was competitive when the data were
» analyzed by the Scatchard method. It should be noted, however, that the
» dose of ketoconazole required for 50% occupancy of the androgen receptor
» is not likely to be achieved in vivo, at least in plasma. Finally,
» androgen binding studies performed with other imidazoles, such as
» clotrimazole, miconazole, and fluconozole, revealed that in this class of
» compounds only ketoconazole appears to interact with the androgen
» receptor. Ketoconazole appears to be the first example of a non-steroidal
» compound which binds competitively to both SSBG and multiple steroid
» hormone receptors, suggesting that the ligand binding sites of these
» proteins share some features in common.
»
» PMID: 1526623 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Glocucorticoid-receptor and Vit D-receptor binding may also be interesting in hair loss.
Vitamin D is really a hormone; according to how we define vitamins and hormones.
» » » I damned sure will express my opinion of the vulgar,
» » » sloppy, uneducated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms on this
» » forum.
» »
» » As opposed to the educated use of manufactured pseudo-medical terms?
» »
» » Here is a term for you: douche bag. Allow me use it in an uneducated
» and
» » vulgar manner: You are a douche bag. Just kidding man.
»
» Although it pains me, we do need to be precise on the mechanisms at play.
»
» Just becuase there are thousands of websites that refer to DHT Blockers,
» or that claim you can grow a 20-inch penis, or that you can eat Krispy
» Kreame and lose weight at the same time, doesn’t make it true.
Whats the difference
if it is blocking DHT at the androgen receptors, its a DHT blocker, even though it may also block the production of DHT by being a 5 AR inhibitor, Saw Palmetto, for example. seems to do a little of both
Please hanging, can ou remind me the effects you noticed with 2% nizoral SHAMPOO when you used it.
Thank you.
GC1961
Im not attacking you , im just posting the reasoning and logic behind my post in response to the topic in this thread.
Gc1961 you postulated that some of it must absorb and hence have systemic effects. Again that is totally wrong and if you look at the original nizoral and extina studies you will see that they found no measurable systemic absorption of Ketoconazole in the blood.
Fine, if you think your words vs all the people cited in the studies can discredit the most recent and relevant and detailed study regarding topical ketoconazole in regards to MPB.
I guess the readers can read all the above and the japan study and believe what they like. The truth will come out on its own i don’t have to re-iterate or attack anyone to do that.
By the way their are more studies on the effect of Nizoral shampoo and increasing hair shaft diameter than the japan one, the reason the japan one is important is that they researched the mode of action and proved it for the 1st time and its the latest of more research to come.
The links i posted above are also very interesting as they state that malaseaz forfoa fungus on the scalp that cause dandruff also cause an inflamatroy response to hair follcles and put them into apoptosis. So Nizoral suppresses this fungus, hence it has a non androgenetic fungus supression, an androgen receptor reduction and another unique mode of action.
But as a topical it is not a DHT blocker or systemic antiandrogen !!!
Hanging
It is important we discuss the real mode of action and the differences between
topical androgen receptor sensitivity action and systemic DHT blockers/anti androgens.
Basically becuase you will get no systemic side effects like the liver damage some people fear munger about with Keto topicals !!!
» GC1961
» Im not attacking you , im just posting the reasoning and logic behind my
» post in response to the topic in this thread.
»
» Gc1961 you postulated that some of it must absorb and hence have systemic
» effects. Again that is totally wrong and if you look at the original
» nizoral and extina studies you will see that they found no measurable
» systemic absorption of Ketoconazole in the blood.
»
» Fine, if you think your words vs all the people cited in the studies can
» discredit the most recent and relevant and detailed study regarding
» topical ketoconazole in regards to MPB.
»
» I guess the readers can read all the above and the japan study and believe
» what they like. The truth will come out on its own i don’t have to
» re-iterate or attack anyone to do that.
»
» By the way their are more studies on the effect of Nizoral shampoo and
» increasing hair shaft diameter than the japan one, the reason the japan
» one is important is that they researched the mode of action and proved it
» for the 1st time and its the latest of more research to come.
»
» The links i posted above are also very interesting as they state that
» malaseaz forfoa fungus on the scalp that cause dandruff also cause an
» inflamatroy response to hair follcles and put them into apoptosis. So
» Nizoral suppresses this fungus, hence it has a non androgenetic fungus
» supression, an androgen receptor reduction and another unique mode of
» action.
»
» But as a topical it is not a DHT blocker or systemic antiandrogen !!!
»
»
»
» Hanging
»
» It is important we discuss the real mode of action and the differences
» between
» topical androgen receptor sensitivity action and systemic DHT
» blockers/anti androgens.
»
» Basically becuase you will get no systemic side effects like the liver
» damage some people fear munger about with Keto topicals !!!
i have seen studies saying that interal keto is dangerous, but none that say it is absorbed to any significant degree, systemically, when applied topically
all i know is im seeing amazing results so im happy
» NO NO NO nizoral is not a DHT blocker
If a drug inhibits the receptor from binding to DHT, isn’t it essentially blocking DHT? Whether it inhibits the receptor site or binds to it itself, it is still stopping DHT from binding. Right?
| Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Terms of Use & Privacy |
This is an advertising site for paid advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.