My History:
I originally started on finasteride. It worked pretty good for me (much better improvement than dutasteride has yielded in the long-run). However, after 6 months I got greedy and jumped on the then-raved about "dutasteride" ("dutasteride had to be better b/c it inhibited more of the bad stuff, right?").
At first, there seemed to be an immediate improvement (like w/in 2 months), then a a minor shed began at month 2/3 mark this shed recovered nicely and I noticed even better improvement by month 6. However, by month 9, I started shedding again . . . but for some reason, this shed has never stopped - my hair density has slowly, but surely, declined over the past year. I have nonetheless stuck it out and am now approaching my 2-year mark.
I stayed with dutasteride for this long in part b/c of the "accepted logic" behind it, and b/c I had heard from some of the dutasteride vets that it took as long as 2 years to really see the rewards. Well, that deadline is about to come and go, so I am about to change things up a bit.
Due to all the spatter over dutasteride working better than finasteride for some, and finasteride better than dutasteride for others, I have speculated in the past that the reason that some people respond better to dutasteride over finasteride, or vise-versa, is that there could be an "optimal ratio" of DHT type 1/2 inhibition on an INDIVIDUAL level (that's right - this would not show up in the "hard data" b/c clinical trials, by their very nature, require large group testing), and it could just be a matter of finding out where you fit on the scale by experimentation? I meand, we all know that our bodies are EXTREMELY sensitive to certain hormone levels - they have to be just about perfect for things to operate normally.
I have stated that, due to differences in individual "genotypes," experimenting with finasteride, dutasteride, or a combination thereof, may be the only way for some people to find the best 1/2 inhibition ratio. Well this whole theory was gawked at by many people here (typical response: "it would be pointless to take finasteride with dutasteride, bla, bla, bla..."). At the time, this ridicule, coupled with how long some of the vets said to wait, caused me to postpone acting on this theory, so decided to wait out my "dutasteride-only" regimine longer. This did not benefit me though.
So, I've decided to change things up a bit. Starting May 1st, it will be dutasteride M/W/F, and finasteride on the others. I am taking this half-way approach in case: (1) my theory is dead wrong; and/or (2) my hairloss gene is just wicked-strong. And this half-way approach would presumably have less of a drastic, negative impact than going back to finasteride completely. If things perk up within 6-12 months, that will satisfy me as to my theory; if not, then you all can tell me how full of crap I was!
CONCLUSION:
I honestly believe that dutasteride and finasteride cannot be accurately compared to one another based on clinical data on their DHT inhibition (at least for hairloss purposes). HOWEVER, I will say that it is always best for beginners to these drugs to always try finasteride first - give it at least a year. Then, only if no significant improvement, should you even consider trying dutasteride or a dutasteride/finasteride combo. There are plenty of success stories with pictures to help you gauge what "significant improvement" entails. Don't just jump on dutasteride after 6 months or b/c you haven't regrown every single hair back!
Sorry for the long post and lack of pictures guys. I hope it was still of some insight.
I originally started on finasteride. It worked pretty good for me (much better improvement than dutasteride has yielded in the long-run). However, after 6 months I got greedy and jumped on the then-raved about "dutasteride" ("dutasteride had to be better b/c it inhibited more of the bad stuff, right?").
At first, there seemed to be an immediate improvement (like w/in 2 months), then a a minor shed began at month 2/3 mark this shed recovered nicely and I noticed even better improvement by month 6. However, by month 9, I started shedding again . . . but for some reason, this shed has never stopped - my hair density has slowly, but surely, declined over the past year. I have nonetheless stuck it out and am now approaching my 2-year mark.
I stayed with dutasteride for this long in part b/c of the "accepted logic" behind it, and b/c I had heard from some of the dutasteride vets that it took as long as 2 years to really see the rewards. Well, that deadline is about to come and go, so I am about to change things up a bit.
Due to all the spatter over dutasteride working better than finasteride for some, and finasteride better than dutasteride for others, I have speculated in the past that the reason that some people respond better to dutasteride over finasteride, or vise-versa, is that there could be an "optimal ratio" of DHT type 1/2 inhibition on an INDIVIDUAL level (that's right - this would not show up in the "hard data" b/c clinical trials, by their very nature, require large group testing), and it could just be a matter of finding out where you fit on the scale by experimentation? I meand, we all know that our bodies are EXTREMELY sensitive to certain hormone levels - they have to be just about perfect for things to operate normally.
I have stated that, due to differences in individual "genotypes," experimenting with finasteride, dutasteride, or a combination thereof, may be the only way for some people to find the best 1/2 inhibition ratio. Well this whole theory was gawked at by many people here (typical response: "it would be pointless to take finasteride with dutasteride, bla, bla, bla..."). At the time, this ridicule, coupled with how long some of the vets said to wait, caused me to postpone acting on this theory, so decided to wait out my "dutasteride-only" regimine longer. This did not benefit me though.
So, I've decided to change things up a bit. Starting May 1st, it will be dutasteride M/W/F, and finasteride on the others. I am taking this half-way approach in case: (1) my theory is dead wrong; and/or (2) my hairloss gene is just wicked-strong. And this half-way approach would presumably have less of a drastic, negative impact than going back to finasteride completely. If things perk up within 6-12 months, that will satisfy me as to my theory; if not, then you all can tell me how full of crap I was!
CONCLUSION:
I honestly believe that dutasteride and finasteride cannot be accurately compared to one another based on clinical data on their DHT inhibition (at least for hairloss purposes). HOWEVER, I will say that it is always best for beginners to these drugs to always try finasteride first - give it at least a year. Then, only if no significant improvement, should you even consider trying dutasteride or a dutasteride/finasteride combo. There are plenty of success stories with pictures to help you gauge what "significant improvement" entails. Don't just jump on dutasteride after 6 months or b/c you haven't regrown every single hair back!
Sorry for the long post and lack of pictures guys. I hope it was still of some insight.
