foam vs liquid

[bsn21]

i'm a nw3 and i just switched to the foam after using the liquid for past month and a half. what should i expected different with the foam compared to the liquid? i've heard of people shedding worse from the foam and that kinda scares me. is there really a difference between the two? thanks in advance for any tips people can give me!

ps: i think i'm gonna use my remaining 3 bottles of the kirkland on my hairline/temples. anyone know the difference between the foam and liquid in those regions?

 

[cmudave]

I used foam for about 5 months or so, didn't seem to do a whole lot for me, I've had better success with the liquid minoxidil. From what i've read foam either helps a great deal, or causes a lot of shedding with little or no improvement. If you haven't started the foam yet, or have only used it for a little while, I would stick it out with the liquid for at least 3 months to see how it works out for you, then if you arent satisfied with the results switch to the foam. Maybe you can use the foam on your temples and hairline instead of the liquid, check out dietcola's thread in the success section of the forums, he had amazing results with the foam on his temples.

 

[PJohn]

I started foam about 6 months ago and boy ... the first couple of months was traumatizing! First I lost EVERYTHING I gained back with liquid minoxidil in the space of about 2 months. Then I lost some more. I was like a deer staring into oncoming headlights! The only thing that kept me going was the fact that I ordered 6 months worth of foam and thought what the hell, it's all over - might as well use up this lot for fun, then shave my head. Guess what ... I just re-ordered because in between month 5 and 6 I saw a dramatic turnaround. I can't explain it. I'm almost back to where I was 6 months ago which is quite something. It was quite a roller coaster ride for me because I have just about made peace with the fact that I'm going to shave my noggin, now I'm all fuzzy on top and hopeful again.

Your mileage may vary though ...

 

[jared_24]

I must admit, I'm a bit cynical regarding how much better the foam version actually is. I get the impression the only reason why people love the foam so much is because it is so much more convenient and less hassle than the liquid.

I was on the liquid version for about 3/4 years. I absolutely hated using it - it was greasy, it was extremely irritant on my scalp (v. itchy and caused reddening), it took ages to dry and when it eventually did - I ended up with loads of white flakey dandruff type stuff covered in my hair. However, it did re-grow a significant amount of hair on my crown and some on my hairline. Though to be honest - the hair it did grow back was very thick (not in a good way) and had a horrid wirey/curly texture to it, almost like pubic hair!!! But at least it made my hair look denser.

However, as soon as I switched over to the foam my hair began to thin out again, but at the time I was so elated regarding how much better and easier it was to apply the foam, I didnt even realise that it wasn't actually as effective as the liquid.

Dont get me wrong, i'm still using the foam to this day (as well as Propecia) but in my honest judgement, for me personally the liquid was much more effective at regrowing hair.... I dont think the foam is even maintaining.

 

[CCS]

most likely it just does not maintain the levels the liquid got you to. I doubt you will fall behind baseline. Maybe the sudden change in amounts causes a shed, which takes months to get back to the new lower level.

I still don't know what I'll do.

 

[jared_24]

For me personally, I consider Propecia to be the best course of action to take. I have been taking it for the past 8 months and it has (without a doubt) maintened my hair extremely well and has defiinitely regrown hair on my crown too (though I'm still waiting to see some regrowth at the front.) I am 90% sure if i had started taking Propecia back when I was 18 my hairloss would not be as bad as it is today. (Though I certainly would not recommend somebody as young as 18 to take it.)

I have been on the foam for the past 16 months or so - if I hadn't added Propcia to my regime I think I would have definitely fallen below baseline.

 

[hair_today]

I have seen many posts from people who swear the liquid worked better for them than foam, as well as many posts from people who swear the opposite. So there may be a wide range of individual responses.

In the 2007 study done by the makers of rogaine foam, the aggregate/average result was less hair growth than the liquid, based on blinded trained evaluators. This comparison was done across separate studies, which is not ideal, but at least they were led by the same researchers. User self-assessment, on the other hand, was higher with foam, and it is those figures which have been commonly cited by the company and in the abstract of the study (search "rogaine foam" on PubMed). The full-text of the study acknowledges this distinction and the researchers suggest that the cosmetic problems of the liquid are responsible for the discrepancy.

Also, I am not sure, but I think there are other numbers as well which have appeared in advertisements which may have come from trials done prior to the 2007 study, which suggest that the foam does indeed grow more hair than the liquid. But I have not been able to locate that information.

So basically it is not entirely clear!