Regrowth Index
Search

About Regrowth Index

Independent, evidence-based reference for the full hair loss landscape: causes, conditions, diagnosis, and treatments.

What we do

Most content on hair loss is either an undisclosed product ad or a vague summary that doesn't help anyone decide what to actually do. Regrowth Index exists to be different. A single reference where adults researching hair loss can find what the published evidence actually says, organised the way a good dermatologist would explain it.

We cover three pillars that interlink throughout the site:

The team

Who writes this

Regrowth Index is written by a small editorial team. Articles are signed by the author who researched and wrote them. Accountability without anonymity.

Medical research editor

Helena Marsh

Helena writes the conditions, diagnosis, and women's hair loss articles on Regrowth Index. She reads the underlying trial data, dermatology society guidelines, and primary sources before each piece is published, with particular attention to dermatology and women's health.

Helena is not a medical doctor; she is a research editor whose job is to translate what the evidence says into language a non-clinician can act on. Articles by Helena cover the full picture, including the parts product manufacturers prefer go unmentioned.

8 articles by Helena →

Science writer

James Ardell

James writes the treatment-focused guides on Regrowth Index: minoxidil, finasteride and dutasteride, hair transplants, and other pharmacological and procedural interventions.

James is a science writer, not a clinician. His job is to read the pharmacology and clinical trial data and present it honestly: what each treatment does, who it works for, what the realistic timeline looks like, and what the side-effect profile genuinely is.

6 articles by James →

Editorial standards

Every article on Regrowth Index follows the same standards. These are not marketing promises; they are the operating rules behind the site, and a reader can hold any article to them.

  1. Every meaningful factual claim is cited to a primary source. Randomised trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, FDA documentation, and dermatology society guidelines are the standard. References sit at the bottom of every article and link directly to PubMed, the FDA, AAD, NHS, or other primary sources.
  2. We name the evidence quality. Where the data is strong, we say so. Where it is weak, mixed, or based on small trials, we say that too. We don't manufacture certainty by hedging the language; we describe what the literature actually supports.
  3. Every article carries a "Reviewed [date] by [author]" line. Dates are not cosmetic. Articles are revised as new evidence emerges, and the date reflects the most recent review.
  4. We don't accept payment to feature, rank, or recommend any product. No clinic, brand, or laboratory has paid for placement on this site. None ever will.
  5. If we ever add affiliate links, they are clearly disclosed and never affect what we recommend or how we rank options. As of this writing, Regrowth Index has no affiliate relationships.
  6. We don't use AI-generated images for medical content. If we use a diagram or photograph, it is real or transparently illustrative.
  7. We correct errors openly. If you find a factual mistake, tell us. We will fix it, update the "Reviewed" date, and add a correction note where the change is material.

How we evaluate evidence

Hair loss is a field where the strength of evidence varies enormously across treatments and conditions. Some interventions (topical minoxidil, oral finasteride for male AGA, JAK inhibitors for severe alopecia areata) have multiple large randomised trials and decades of post-marketing data. Others (most supplements, many "hair clinic" proprietary blends, some procedural treatments) have only small open-label studies or none at all.

Our default hierarchy:

When tiers conflict (for example, when a small trial finds an effect that a larger, better-controlled trial doesn't replicate) we follow the higher-quality evidence and say explicitly that we are doing so.

Conflict of interest

As of the most recent review of this page, Regrowth Index has no commercial relationships with any pharmaceutical company, hair clinic, supplement brand, or laboratory. No author on the site has been compensated by any commercial party named in these articles.

In future, the site may add affiliate relationships, for example to drug pricing services, peer-reviewed continuing education, or commercial laboratories that offer relevant blood panels. If and when that happens, every affiliate link will be clearly labelled in the article where it appears, and the relationship will be disclosed at the top of this page. Affiliate revenue will never influence what we recommend or how we rank options.

What this site is not

Regrowth Index is not a substitute for medical advice. We summarise published evidence to help you have a better-informed conversation with a qualified clinician, not to replace that conversation. If hair loss is rapid, painful, accompanied by scalp inflammation, or affecting your wellbeing, see a dermatologist or your GP. We say this because it's true, not as a disclaimer to dilute everything else on the site.

How to flag errors or get in touch

If you find a factual error (a misquoted study, an outdated trial result, a missed contraindication) please tell us. We will fix it, update the "Reviewed" date on the affected article, and add a correction note where the change is material. We don't currently take pitches for content from drug companies, hair clinics, or supplement brands.

Last reviewed: April 2026.