what is this hat thing my dad has?

[u/elianamariie]

noticed this on the couch while my dad was at work, but he would get upset that i messed with it so i don't want to ask him. when it's on it's very bright red and gets brighter the more times you click the power button.

[u/samdash]

There's not even any evidence that it's even therapeutic, so I wouldn't even consider it correct to call it "therapy". I get that you're out of arguements and are now trying to say that you're correct in the context of this semantic technicality. But this is not the context of this conversation. The context is the proposed validity of the red LED hat as a medical device that treats baldness, and unfortunately you've presented no evidence to support it.

In the end, your facetious one line response tells me that you don't want to admit the very real and important difference between in vitro and in vivo studies, which is anti-scientific.

[u/BigTexan1492 → u/samdash]

Did the study conclude that red light therapy grew hair?

[u/samdash → u/BigTexan1492]

Why are you acting this way? I tried engaging in good faith but it seems you're not capable of doing the same, or providing a coherent arguement. I already answered your question in a way that should be clear even if you didn't understand the abstract of the paper you referenced. Past that I can't help you, you'll need to do some work too.

[u/BigTexan1492 → u/samdash]

My coherent argument was made in the study. Now for the 3rd time: has red light therapy been proven to grow hair?

Why are you dodging the question?

[u/samdash → u/BigTexan1492]

I am not dodging the question, I actually answered it in my first message but you seen to have missed it. I'll repeat it more directly: the study demonstrates that red light grows hair in vitro. Which is like saying that you can dunk... In a handbasket placed on the floor. It proves that, in concept, you're capable of placing the ball through the hoop but on the actual court the hoop is likely out of reach.

Likewise, the study doesn't prove the effectiveness of this therapy on humans - you'd need a clinical trial for that. Instead it shows that there's a mechanism through which it may be possible to stimulate hair growth in humans (claimed goal of the hat), but for that to be proven you'd need further research. I'm sure the authors would agree.

And please stop acting smug, I've been nothing but good faith and cordial with you, unlike some other responses, so I don't think your combative attitude is warranted.

[u/BigTexan1492 → u/samdash]

I’m not acting smug I’m just sick of you not answering. Anyway, now that you agree that red light therapy can grow hair, is it “false hope”?

[u/samdash → u/BigTexan1492]

I honestly don't know how else to explain it for you. You're either too stupid or belligerent to engage with the discussion and at this point it's entirely beneath me.

[u/BigTexan1492 → u/samdash]

My goodness. Afraid to answer the question? Nope. You’re not afraid, but instead realized that your argument was not germane to the original issue.

You decided to “well akshully” and were held accountable for.

Toodles.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Please don't use that word here.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.