
What’s The Difference Between Minoxidil For Men vs For Women?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!
Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!
In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!
As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!
So, no question/request too big or small 😎
❝I’m confused, does minoxidil work the same for women and for men? The label on the minoxidil I was looking at says it is only for men❞
Great question!
Simple answer: yes, it works (or not, as the case may be for some people, more on that later) exactly the same for men and women.
You may be wondering: what, then, is the difference between minoxidil for men and minoxidil for women?
And the answer is: the packaging/marketing. That’s literally it.
It’s like with razors, there are razors marketed to men and razors marketed to women, and both come with advertising/marketing promising to be enhance your masculine/feminine appearance (as applicable), but at the end of the day, in both cases it’s just sharp steel blades that cut through hairs as closely as possible to the skin. The sharp steel neither knows nor cares about your gender.
When it comes to minoxidil, in both cases the active ingredient is indeed minoxidil, usually at 2% or 5% strength (though other options exist, and all these get marketed to men and women), and in both cases it works in the same ways, by:
- dilating the blood vessels that feed the hair follicles and thus allowing them to perform better
- kicking the follicles into anagen (growth phase) and keeping them there for longer
Note: this is why we mentioned that it won’t work for all people, and it’s because (regardless of sex/gender), it cannot do those things for your hair follicles if you do not have hair follicles to treat. In the case of someone who has had hair loss for a long time, sometimes there will not be enough living follicles remaining to do anything useful with. As a general rule of thumb, provided you have some hairs there (even if they are little downy baby hairs), they can usually be coaxed back to full life.
In both cases, it’s for treating “pattern hair loss”, the pattern being “male pattern” or “female pattern”, respectively, but in both cases it’s androgenetic alopecia, and in both cases it’s caused by the corresponding genetic factors and hormone-mediated gene expression (the physical pattern therefore is usually a little different for men and women; that’s because of the “hormone-mediated gene expression”, or to put it into lay terms “the hormones tell the body which genes to turn on and off”.
Fun fact: it’s the same resultant phenotype as for PCOS, though usually occurring at different stages in life; PCOS earlier and AGA later—sometimes people (including people with both ovaries and hair) can get one without the other, though, as there may be other considerations going on besides the genetic and hormonal.
Limitation: if the hair loss is for reasons other than androgenetic alopecia, it’s unlikely to work. In fact, it is usually flat-out stated that it won’t work, but since one of the common listed side effects of minoxidil is “hair growth in other places”, it seems fair to say that the scalp is not really the only place it can cause hair to grow.
Want to know more?
You can read about the science of various pharmaceutical options (including minoxidil) here:
Hair-Loss Remedies, By Science ← this also goes more into the pros and cons of minoxidil than we have today, so if you’re considering minoxidil, you might want to read this first, to make the most informed decision.
And if you want to be a bit less pharmaceutical about it:
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Carrot vs Kale – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing carrot to kale, we picked the kale.
Why?
These are both known as carotene-containing heavyweights, but kale emerges victorious:
In terms of macros, carrot has more carbs while kale has more protein and fiber. An easy win there for kale.
When it comes to vitamins, both are great! But, carrots contain more of vitamins A, B5, and choline, whereas kale contains more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B9, C, E, and K. And while carrot’s strongest point is vitamin A, a cup of carrots contains around 10x the recommended daily dose of vitamin A, whereas a cup of kale contains “only” 6x the recommended daily dose of vitamin A. So, did we really need the extra in carrots? Probably not. In any case, kale already won on overall vitamin coverage, by a long way.
In the category of minerals, kale again sweeps. On the one hand, carrots contain more sodium. On the other hand, kale contains a lot more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc. Not a tricky choice!
But don’t be fooled: carrots really are a nutritional powerhouse and a great food. Kale is just better—nutritionally speaking, in any case. If you’re making a carrot cake, please don’t try substituting kale; it will not work 😉
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Upgrade Your Life – by Pat Divilly
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Pat Divilly takes us through the steps to establish what it is we want out of life, adopt daily habits of success, build our self-esteem and confidence, and pursue what’s actually fulfilling, whatever that is for us as individuals.
The general layout of the book is: first, figuring out where you genuinely want to go (not just where people expect you to want to go!), and then seeing about what things you can change, first small and then larger, to get there.
The scope of the book covers work life and personal life, and treats them both as something where you can optimize how things work for you, and those around you. All in all, unless your life is literally perfect in every way imaginable, there’s probably something in this book that will help you to, indeed, “upgrade your life”. And who wouldn’t want that?
Share This Post
-
Immunity – by Dr. William Paul
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
This book gives a very person-centric (i.e., focuses on the contributions of named individuals) overview of advances in the field of immunology—up to its publication date in 2015. So, it’s not cutting edge, but it is very good at laying the groundwork for understanding more recent advances that occur as time goes by. After all, immunology is a field that never stands still.
We get a good grounding in how our immune system works (and how it doesn’t), the constant arms race between pathogens and immune responses, and the complexities of autoimmune disorders and—which is functionally in an overlapping category of disease—cancer. And, what advances we can expect soon to address those things.
Given the book was published 8 years ago, how did it measure up? Did we get those advances? Well, for the mostpart yes, we have! Some are still works in progress. But, we’ve also had obvious extra immunological threats in years since, which have also resulted in other advances along the way!
If the book has a downside, it’s that sometimes the author can be a little too person-centric. It’s engaging to focus on human characters, and helps us bring information to life; name-dropping to excess, along with awards won, can sometimes feel a little like the book was co-authored by Tahani Al-Jamil.
Nevertheless, it certainly does keep the book from getting too dry!
Bottom line: this book is a great overview of immunology and immunological research, for anyone who wants to understand these things better.
Click here to check out Immunity, and boost your knowledge of yours!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Walk Like You’re 20 Years Younger Again
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
How fit, healthy, strong, and mobile were you 20 years ago? For most people, the answer is “better than now”. Physiotherapist Dr. Doug Weiss has advice on turning back the clock:
The exercises
If you already have no problems walking, this one is probably not for you. However, if you’re not so able to comfortably walk as you used to be, then Dr. Weiss recommends:
- Pillow squat: putting pillow on a chair, crossing hands on chest, standing up and sitting down. Similar to the very important “getting up off the floor without using your hands” exercise, but easier.
- Wall leaning: standing against a wall with heels 4″ away from it, crossing arms over chest again, and pulling the body off the wall using the muscles in the front of the shin. Note, this means not cheating by using other muscles, leveraging the upper body, pushing off with the buttocks, or anything else like that.
- Stepping forward: well, this certainly is making good on the promise of walking like we did 20 years ago; there sure was a lot of stepping forward involved. More seriously, this is actually about stepping over some object, first with support, and then without.
- Heel raise: is what it sounds like, raising up on toes and back down again; first with support, then without.
- Side stepping: step sideways 2–3 steps in each direction. First with support, then without. Bonus: if your support is your partner, then congratulations, you are now dancing bachata.
For more details (and visual demonstration) of these exercises and more, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
4 Tips To Stand Without Using Hands
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Bamboo Shoots vs Asparagus – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing bamboo shoots to asparagus, we picked the asparagus.
Why?
Both are great! But asparagus does distinguish itself on nutritional density.
In terms of macros, bamboo starts strong with more protein and fiber, but it’s not a huge amount more; the margins of difference are quite small.
In the category of vitamins, asparagus wins easily with more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B9, C, E, K, and choline. In contrast, bamboo boasts only more vitamin B6. A clear win for asparagus.
The minerals line-up is closer; asparagus has more calcium, iron, magnesium, and selenium, while bamboo shoots have more manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. That’s a 4:4 tie, but asparagus’s margins of difference are larger, and if we need a further tiebreaker, bamboo also contains more sodium, which most people in the industrialized world could do with less of rather than more. So, a small win for asparagus.
In short, adding up the sections… Bamboo shoots, but asparagus scores, and wins the day. Enjoy both, of course, but if making a pick, then asparagus has more bang-for-buck.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Asparagus vs Eggplant – Which is Healthier?
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Cherries vs Grapes – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing cherries to grapes, we picked the cherries.
Why?
First, let’s mention: we are looking at sour cherries and Californian grapes. Even those will of course vary in quality, but the nutritional values here are quite reliable averages.
In terms of macros you might have guessed this one: cherries have nearly 2x the fiber and grapes have about 50% more carbs. So, while neither fruit is bad and they are both low glycemic index foods, cherry is the winner in this category.
When it comes to vitamins, cherries have more of vitamins A, B3, B5, B9, C, and choline, while grapes have more of vitamins B1, B2, B6, E, and K. That’s a 6:5 win for cherries, and the respective margins of difference bear that out too.
In the category of minerals, cherries have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, and zinc, while grapes have more manganese and potassium. An easy 6:2 win for cherries.
You might be wondering about polyphenols: both are very abundant in very many polyphenols; so much and so many, in fact, that we couldn’t possibly try to adjudicate between them without doing some complex statistical modeling (especially given how much this can vary from one sample to another, much more so than the micro-and macronutrient values discussed above), so we’ll call it a tie on these.
Adding up the section makes for a clear win for cherries, but of course, enjoy either or both!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Cherries’ Very Healthy Wealth Of Benefits!
Resveratrol & Healthy AgingTake care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: