Fluridil and Flutamide

To date, I have covered two anti-androgens in detail on this blog: namely, Spironolactone and RU58841.  Two other anti-androgens, fluridil and flutamide, are also fairly popular in the hair loss world. Due to their similar names, many people confuse the two, so I am writing one post to cover both products.  I also do not want to write too many separate posts on anti-androgens, but do want to cover the main ones.

Fluridil versus Flutamide

Over the years, on all major hair loss forums people have created a number of threads asking whether fluridil or flutamide is better for treating hair loss.

If you do a google search for each product, flutamide has 423,000 results and fluridil has only 15,900 results.  Clearly, this is a no contest when it comes to importance (by comparison, Spironolactone has 728,000 results and RU58841 has 78,600 results).

Moreover, if you do a search on Pubmed, flutamide has 3,238 results (although the majority are not related to scalp hair loss issues) and fluridil has only two results (!) with only one of those two being of significance.  So based on popularity, it seems like flutamide is the way to go.

It would also seem that because flutamide is so heavily studied per the number of Pubmed results, its side effects are unlikely to result in any major surprises.

However, based on effectiveness, the superiority of flutamide over fluridil is is not clear when reading hair loss forum testimonials.


Flutamide is a synthetic anti-androgen that was first approved by the US FDA in 1989 to treat prostate cancer in men.  The drug is sold under numerous brand names.  According to the wikipedia entry on Flutamide, the drug has now largely been replaced with newer anti-androgens with fewer side effects.  I am not so sure if this is true when it comes to scalp hair regrowth applications since numerous hair loss forum members continue to use flutamide. Moreover, topical application of flutamide via nanoparticles could results in fewer or no side effects.

An interesting study from 2011 where a women with hair loss saw no results when on Spironolactone plus topical Minoxidil, but did see hair regrowth when on Flutamide.

An interesting study comparing Finasteride, Flutamide and Spironolactone for treating hirsutism (all three almost equally effective in reducing body hair modestly).


The chemical name for Fluridil is Topilutamide.  Fluridil is currently sold via the brand name Eucapil, a topical product that is manufactured by Czech Republic based company Interpharma that holds patent rights to Fluridil.  The company claims that Eucapil is not absorbed systematically and it has thus far not resulted in any side effects.  Interpharma was founded in 1932, and became a subsidiary of Japan’s Otsuka Pharmaceutical in 2008. Eucapil is only approved for sale in several European countries, but many people around the world seem to be getting their hands on the product easily.

The one and only study on Pubmed regarding Fluridil is from 2002, and suggests a modest benefit (anagen hair quantity increased from 76 percent to 87 percent) for hair loss sufferers with no major side effects.  Also see this one other important paper on Fluridil.   Eucapil’s before and after photos of scalp hair when using Fluridil seem decent, but perhaps they are exhibiting a best case scenario.


There are numerous anti-androgens available in the market today. If I were to take one just for scalp hair loss, I would only use a topical one in order to limit side effects.  When it comes to effectiveness on scalp hair, do not expect miracles.  While it seems like all anti-androgens result in some benefit for scalp hair for most users, regrowing long lost hair is not at all likely.

As far as flutamide versus fluridil, I am not sure which one is more effective, but fluridil seems to be somewhat safer, although flutamide is by no means dangerous from what I have read on the various hair loss forums and studies.  It is imperative to consult a doctor prior to trying such drugs, as my opinions and conclusions based on just internet research can easily be incorrect.  I am neither a doctor, nor educated or experienced in any kind of medical field.

19 thoughts on “Fluridil and Flutamide”

  1. Admin what is the efficiency of regrowth factors of pluripotent stem cells and skin fibroblast media in fighting baldness?

  2. ADMIN this is a study report saying that finasteride does not cause undesirable sexual side effects.
    J Androl. 2008 Sep-Oct;29(5):514-23. doi: 10.2164/jandrol.108.005025. Epub 2008 Apr 17.
    The effect of 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors on erectile function.
    Canguven O1, Burnett AL.
    Author information
    The 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors, which inhibit conversion of testosterone to dihydrotestosterone, are used for miscellaneous clinical applications, including the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia and male pattern hair loss, and for possible reduction of the risk of prostate cancer. Erectile dysfunction has been associated with 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors. Overall, reports in the literature suggest rates of erectile dysfunction to be between 0.8%-33% in men using these medications. However, randomized controlled studies report the rates of erectile dysfunction to be between 0.8%-15.8%. The possible risk association is that these medications impact androgen function, which is understood to contribute to normal erectile physiology. The 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors result in a drop in median serum dihydrotestosterone levels by 60%-93% within 2 years, but there is no major change in testosterone levels. In this review, we surveyed studies on erectile dysfunction in patients treated with 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors and critically examined the evidence that associates 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors and erectile dysfunction. We conclude that 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors do not lead to erectile dysfunction to a significant degree, and we support the position that dihydrotestosterone is less relevant than testosterone in erectile function.

    1. HAHAHAHHAHAHAHA…… aaaaa.
      yeah tell that to millions who experienced otherwise, firsthand. Including me. I didn’t even know libido had something to do with hormones, basically I had libido so strong ever since I was 9 (yeah, nine) years old that I thought it was god given as eyesight. Boy was I wrong. In my case, finasteride shut the libido down to the ground. Balls shrinked significantly as well. Fortunately, all the sides reversed after I stopped taking it. So good luck believing in those “studies”.

  3. I agree with Matt. Or some new updates on Follica. Looks like they updated their website about their wounding technique. Maybe the hair gods will have mercy on us and that a new baldness therapy will be released out of nowhere this year. Hey its been 20 years since the release of propecia I think it’s time for something new lol

  4. Mjones u right, Propecia been in the market for quite sometime, we need new effective treatment, for Gods sake make it happen next year, I’m dying of stress

  5. Isaac I feel you man. My hair loss has kicked into over drive for whatever reason this past two years. Propecia worked great for the 12 years I have been on it but now it has stopped working and my hsir line is getting destroyed . I added rogaine last Nov but I think it may have speed up my balding in my hsir line and thickened up only healthy hairs I have. I am just so mad that nothing new has come out this whole time and there is nothing I can do to keep my hair 🙁

  6. Ive been reading a bit about how readily the scalp absorbs chemicals into the bloodstream compared to other parts of the skin on your body. It makes me wonder whether a topical product would really proffer fewer side effects than an oral one :/

  7. Good find Paul! Yes propecia and rogaine are very dated and old school. Rogaine is over 30 years old wtf! I mean come on. How many new acne drugs, erectile dysfunction drugs, botox injection type of drugs have hit the market while we are still stuck with meds from the 90s and 80s. Merk should have came up with a stronger potent propecia for when it loses effectiveness on its patients who have been on it over 7 years. We need something today, not 2017, 2019 or 10 yrs from now. Something that can grow back at least from Norwood 4 to Norwood 2. Not some bs treatment that grows back 15 hairs. Real thick dense terminal hair.

  8. @admin and others: Apparently the new cure act set into play by congress will expediate the length required for trials. Has anyone heard an update on this as in if it was signed into law and how much faster the regulations and required time to show efficacy will change?

  9. Matt -if the law gets passed it will allow certain breakthrough drugs to skip phase 3. Now what the fda considers phase 3 is unknown. Knowing our luck a baldness drug won’t be considered a breakthrough and we will be stuck in the cure is 5 to 10 yrs away. I will have hope when I can see a news report on ABC nightly news showing a baldness drug raking a Norwood 4 to. Thick Norwood 2. Anything less is a joke unless the medicine cm stop hair loss completely because we don’t even have that at the moment

  10. I would say a true cure for baldness is as far as 2060 or something. A cure that would work on people with already receding hair line, or bald head. 2020 is just too soon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *