H
HighIQPerson
Iron
- Joined
- May 12, 2025
- Posts
- 1
- Reputation
- 0
Everyone already knows that minoxidil works to grow/maintain hair follicles when consistently used. But what we are not completely certain about is what happens if usage is stopped.
Studies on this topic we have now are mainly focused on how stopping minoxidil usage causes scalp follicles fueled by it to shed(it is not permanent on the scalp).
But that doesn't necessarily generalize to beard/eyebrow/eyelash hair because there is a plausible reason why it wouldn't: DHT concentration is lower in these areas compared to the scalp, so terminal hairs on the face may stay.
There are numerous anecdotes on whether minoxidil-hairs are really permanent after stopping, after a reasonably long usage period(for example 1 year), from what I can see a majority reported that yes it did work somewhat.
However even if this is some evidence in support, it is not scientifically valid, there could be factors like confirmation bias.
For example because of the sunk cost fallacy you imagine that it really did work and your efforts were not wasted, even if it didn't work.
Why isn't such a scientific study done yet? It is not an impossible thing to do, but actually a priorities and incentives problem.
Minoxidil for the face is off-label and generic, so there is no company with a clear financial reason to conduct the study. Academic groups also view this sort of cosmetic thing as low priority and low impact, which is also why they haven't done it yet.
A workable way to do it: A clean way to answer the question would be a randomized-discontinuation design: treat everyone for, say, twelve months; randomize responders to continue minoxidil or switch to placebo; follow both arms for another six to twelve months with blinded hair counts, hair-shaft caliber measurements, and standardized photos; and define success as maintaining a prespecified fraction of the on-treatment gains. Stratifying by age and baseline vellus/terminal mix, and tracking androgen status, would control key confounders.
This is not to say that the theoretical study would be cheap, it is not. But an estimated cost would be around mid 6 figures to low 7 figures, which is high, but in the grand scheme of things, is not that much compared to the potential utility of the knowledge. Therefore it is quite a feasible goal for such an amount to be crowdfunded, as the result would be very useful to many people.
For example there is already a significant product cost for any individual who wants to buy and use minoxidil. However that pales in comparison to the opportunity cost of time and effort spent applying it if it doesn't actually work. If it actually does work though, scientific proof of that would convince many more people to try it out.
Why would the result be important to this community in particular? In general people are naturally aversed to "hardmaxxes" or surgeries in general, because of its inherent risks. Therefore most only try low risk softmaxxes. Minoxidil which affects hair is probably the second most effective softmax behind losing weight, so the results if positive would be a very valuable common good.
Studies on this topic we have now are mainly focused on how stopping minoxidil usage causes scalp follicles fueled by it to shed(it is not permanent on the scalp).
But that doesn't necessarily generalize to beard/eyebrow/eyelash hair because there is a plausible reason why it wouldn't: DHT concentration is lower in these areas compared to the scalp, so terminal hairs on the face may stay.
There are numerous anecdotes on whether minoxidil-hairs are really permanent after stopping, after a reasonably long usage period(for example 1 year), from what I can see a majority reported that yes it did work somewhat.
However even if this is some evidence in support, it is not scientifically valid, there could be factors like confirmation bias.
For example because of the sunk cost fallacy you imagine that it really did work and your efforts were not wasted, even if it didn't work.
Why isn't such a scientific study done yet? It is not an impossible thing to do, but actually a priorities and incentives problem.
Minoxidil for the face is off-label and generic, so there is no company with a clear financial reason to conduct the study. Academic groups also view this sort of cosmetic thing as low priority and low impact, which is also why they haven't done it yet.
A workable way to do it: A clean way to answer the question would be a randomized-discontinuation design: treat everyone for, say, twelve months; randomize responders to continue minoxidil or switch to placebo; follow both arms for another six to twelve months with blinded hair counts, hair-shaft caliber measurements, and standardized photos; and define success as maintaining a prespecified fraction of the on-treatment gains. Stratifying by age and baseline vellus/terminal mix, and tracking androgen status, would control key confounders.
This is not to say that the theoretical study would be cheap, it is not. But an estimated cost would be around mid 6 figures to low 7 figures, which is high, but in the grand scheme of things, is not that much compared to the potential utility of the knowledge. Therefore it is quite a feasible goal for such an amount to be crowdfunded, as the result would be very useful to many people.
For example there is already a significant product cost for any individual who wants to buy and use minoxidil. However that pales in comparison to the opportunity cost of time and effort spent applying it if it doesn't actually work. If it actually does work though, scientific proof of that would convince many more people to try it out.
Why would the result be important to this community in particular? In general people are naturally aversed to "hardmaxxes" or surgeries in general, because of its inherent risks. Therefore most only try low risk softmaxxes. Minoxidil which affects hair is probably the second most effective softmax behind losing weight, so the results if positive would be a very valuable common good.
Last edited:
