The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Dihydrotestosterone does two things that are bad for hair maintenance and hair growth. First of all, it shortens the antigen phase, that growth phase. Whatever hair is going to grow is going to occur over a shorter period of time. Second of all, because of the presence of androgen receptors on the stem cell niche area and around it, it actually miniaturize the follicle and the stem cell niche.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Now, anything that reduces 5- alpha reductase is going to reduce DHT, is going to maintain or extend the growth phase, the antigen phase of hair growth and is going to offset or prevent some of the telogen phase, the pinching off and the removal of that stem cell niche.