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.
DHT itself is not bad. If we take a step back and we acknowledge testosterone levels are higher in males and females at younger ages as opposed to older, but as they get older, there is more 5-alpha reductase activity, which is converting more of that testosterone to dihydrotestosterone and dihydrotestosterone inhibits hair growth by reducing IGF-1 and cyclic AMP, well, then we should all be aboard why it is that by age 50, about 50% of people experience pattern hair loss.
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.