Supplements for Hair Growth: What the Evidence Actually Shows

If you are finding more hair in the shower drain than you used to, the first question is usually the practical one: will a supplement actually help? The honest answer is that it depends almost entirely on why your hair is shedding. Sometimes a nutrient makes a real difference. Often it does very little. This article grades the evidence for the supplements people ask about most. It names the studies, the doses, and the populations behind each claim. It also tells you plainly where the research is strong, where it is thin, and where a supplement is the wrong tool for the job.

What the Hair Growth Cycle Explains

Every hair on your head is on its own schedule. At any moment, roughly 85 percent of them are in the growth phase, called anagen, which lasts two to six years [30]. A small number are in catagen, the transitional phase that runs up to two weeks. The rest are in telogen, the resting phase that lasts one to four months before the hair releases and falls out [30].

That cycle is why shedding is a lagging indicator, not a real-time one. When something disrupts the follicle, whether that is illness, surgery, a crash diet, childbirth, or a new medication, the hair does not fall out that week. It gets pushed into telogen early, sits there, and drops about two to three months later.

This single fact explains the most common complaint about hair supplements: nothing appears to happen in the first eight weeks. The hair that was already committed to shedding has to fall out first. A realistic window for judging any hair intervention is at least three to six months, which follows directly from how long telogen lasts [30].

What you see in the mirror today reflects a decision your follicles made months ago. That delay is why a supplement can look like it failed when it is simply too early to tell.

First, Which Kind of Hair Loss Is It

Supplements address the deficiency-driven kind of shedding. That is a narrow lane, and it matters to know whether you are in it before you spend money. Here are the four patterns a dermatologist sorts people into, described in plain terms.

• Telogen effluvium. Diffuse shedding across the whole scalp, usually after a physical or emotional trigger. It is the pattern most likely to involve nutrition.
• Androgenetic alopecia. Patterned thinning driven by genetics and hormones. A community-based study in a north Anatolian population found it in 31.8 percent of people overall, 47.6 percent of men, and 19.17 percent of women [32]. Here the follicle miniaturizes, and a biotin gummy does not change that.
• Alopecia areata. An autoimmune condition that produces smooth, round patches. A doctor diagnoses and manages it.
• Traction alopecia. Loss from sustained tension, common with tight braids, ponytails, or extensions. The fix is mechanical, not nutritional.

In women, patterned thinning can also show up alongside polycystic ovary syndrome, which a doctor diagnoses and manages with a much broader plan than a supplement.

See a doctor promptly rather than self-treating if any of these apply:

• Sudden patchy loss, or loss with scalp scaling, redness, or scarring
• Hair loss alongside unexplained fatigue or weight change
• Loss during pregnancy or breastfeeding
• Loss that started soon after beginning a new medication

That last one is worth acting on quickly, because some drug-related shedding is reversible once a clinician adjusts the prescription.

How to Read the Evidence in This Article

Most hair supplement articles treat every nutrient as if it sits on the same footing. It does not. So each section below carries a label.

• Strong. Multiple human studies point the same direction, and at least one is well designed.
• Moderate. Human trials exist, but they are small, industry-funded, or focused on a narrower population than the label suggests.
• Weak. Suggestive lab or observational data, without a convincing human trial.
• Not supported. The best-designed human trial found no benefit, or the evidence does not hold up.

Read the label as a filter, not a verdict. A "Weak" grade does not mean a nutrient is useless to everyone. It means the average reader should not expect a measurable change from it.

Iron and Ferritin: The One With Real Numbers

This is the strongest-evidence nutrient in the entire category, and it is the one most articles discuss without ever giving a number. Here are the numbers.

A study of 100 women, 50 with telogen effluvium and 50 healthy controls, compared the two groups. The TE group averaged a serum ferritin of 24.30 ng/mL, against 44.78 ng/mL in controls (p<0.001). Ferritin below 15 ng/mL appeared in 28 percent of the cases and 0 percent of the controls [5].

A pooled meta-analysis of trace elements in telogen effluvium found the same direction: significantly lower ferritin, with a standardized mean difference of -0.57 (95 percent CI -1.01 to -0.12), and significantly lower vitamin D at -0.87 (95 percent CI -1.49 to -0.25) [7].

In one 200-woman study of iron supplementation in telogen effluvium, patient satisfaction split at a baseline ferritin of 50 ng/mL. Higher elemental iron doses and longer courses tracked with better satisfaction [6]. A review of hair loss in patients on long-term or home parenteral nutrition suggests targeting a serum ferritin of 70 µg/L when hair loss is otherwise unexplained, while noting there is insufficient evidence to recommend iron in people who are not anemic [35].

A phototrichogram study of 108 women with diffuse hair loss adds a functional detail: in the group with ferritin under 40 ng/mL, the mean telogen ratio was significantly higher than the anagen ratio (p<0.05), meaning more follicles were sitting in the resting phase [34].

Now the counterweight, because it matters. Ferritin is an acute-phase reactant. Inflammation can push it up and make a genuinely low iron store look normal, so a single number read without context can mislead [8]. And a case-control study of 90 patients with chronic telogen effluvium against 90 controls found no significant difference in ferritin, or in hemoglobin, B12, thyroid function, vitamin D, or copper. Zinc was the one mineral that came out significantly lower [9]. That study concluded nutritional deficiencies are less common in TE than commonly assumed.

So iron is not a guaranteed fix, and it is not something to self-prescribe. Iron supplements should only be taken when a doctor confirms a deficiency, because excess iron is harmful. Dose and duration belong to your clinician, guided by repeat bloodwork.

Vitamin D

The pattern here is consistent, and the treatment evidence is early.

A small trial of 40 women with telogen effluvium against 20 controls found a mean 25-hydroxyvitamin D of 13.31 ng/mL in the TE group versus 33.61 ng/mL in controls (p<0.001). After three months of oral vitamin D, their levels rose significantly [12]. The same pooled analysis that flagged low ferritin also found significantly lower vitamin D in TE, with a standardized mean difference of -0.87 [7].

There is a plausible mechanism. Vitamin D receptor signaling is directly involved in how the follicle cycles [13].

The honest caveat: the trial authors state that the result needs larger-scale verification, and that the optimal dose and duration for hair outcomes are not established [12]. So vitamin D is worth correcting with a vitamin D3 supplement when a blood test shows you are low. It is not a hair growth strategy on its own.

Zinc

Zinc has evidence pointing in two directions, and both are worth seeing, along with the form and dose you choose.

On one side, zinc tends to be lower in people with hair loss. In 32 patients with severe alopecia areata against 32 controls, serum zinc was significantly lower (p=0.017), deficiency was more prevalent (p=0.011), and lower zinc correlated with greater severity. The authors called for randomized trials [11]. The chronic telogen effluvium study mentioned above also found zinc significantly lower in cases [9].

On the other side sits the largest study in the set. Researchers looked at 23,975 patients and found zinc was lower in the hair-loss group, with a median of 96 µg/dL against 99 µg/dL (p<0.001). The authors then wrote that the difference "lacks clinical significance" and advised that zinc should not be ordered routinely when investigating hair loss [10].

The reasonable reading: zinc deficiency does affect hair, and true deficiency deserves correction with a well-absorbed zinc supplement. A routine zinc supplement for unexplained shedding is not supported by the largest dataset available.

Biotin: The Most Popular, The Least Supported

Biotin is the ingredient on nearly every hair, skin, and nails label. It also has the weakest support of anything in this article, and a review in the Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic Dermatology says so directly.

That review screened the literature and found only three studies qualified for inclusion. The best-designed of them, a double-blind placebo-controlled trial, found no difference between biotin and placebo for hair growth. The authors concluded that the utility of biotin as a hair supplement is not supported by high-quality studies [1].

True biotin deficiency is rare, but when it occurs it does cause hair thinning along with an eczematous rash. So biotin helps if you are genuinely deficient, and essentially nobody eating a varied diet is [3].

There is a second issue that most commercial roundups skip entirely: biotin skews common lab tests. It causes positive interference in competitive immunoassays, which means falsely high FT3 and FT4, and negative interference in sandwich assays, which means falsely low TSH [2]. Falsely low troponin results have been reported too, which is a serious problem in an emergency room [3].

How much does it take? One analysis found biotin above 500 ng/mL caused changes of 20 percent or more in assay values, while newer reagents tolerate 1000 to 3000 ng/mL [4]. A supplement dose is not the same thing as a serum concentration, so the reliable move is not to estimate your own level but to stop biotin before any bloodwork.

If you take biotin, do two things: tell your doctor and your phlebotomist, and stop biotin two to three days before any bloodwork [2][4]. That is the practical takeaway. A supplement that does not help your hair should never be allowed to confuse a thyroid or cardiac workup.

Collagen and Marine Protein

This category has real trials behind it, and the population matters more than the headline.

First, the caveat. A randomized controlled trial of low-molecular-weight collagen peptide at 3 g/day for 24 weeks found improvements in hair gloss, elasticity, and diameter. The participants had damaged hair and no alopecia [14]. That is a study of hair condition, not hair growth. It is not evidence that collagen regrows lost hair.

A separate systematic review of hydrolyzed collagen for skin outcomes looked at 25 randomized trials. Skin hydration improved in 10 of 15 trials, elasticity in 10 of 13, and wrinkles in 9 of 10. The same review found that the majority of trials were rated at high risk of bias [19]. Those outcomes are skin, not hair.

The industry-sponsored work is more on point, and it is worth reading carefully:

• A marine complex supplement taken twice daily in men with thinning hair produced significant increases in total hair count, total hair density, and terminal hair density at 180 days (p=0.001 for each) [15].
• A six-month randomized trial of a nutraceutical supplement in women with self-perceived thinning hair found significant increases in terminal and vellus hairs at day 90 and day 180 versus placebo (p<0.009) [16].
• A companion trial in perimenopausal, menopausal, and postmenopausal women found progressive significant increases in terminal and total hair counts at days 90 and 180, with shedding reduced by 32.41 percent at day 180 [17].
• An oral supplement combining hydrolyzed fish collagen, taurine, cysteine, methionine, iron, and selenium was tested in 83 subjects over 12 weeks as an add-on to drug treatment. The supplement group improved more than the drug-only group on a global assessment score [18].

Grade: Moderate. The trials are randomized and placebo-controlled, but most are industry-funded, and the meta-analytic picture is mixed. A systematic review of commercial oral supplements pooled 14 studies and 967 participants. It found reduced telogen hair density and increased anagen hair density versus placebo, but total hair count showed no significant difference (p=0.06). Its own conclusion was that more rigorous, independent research is needed [28].

Saw Palmetto

Saw palmetto is the most interesting entry in the category, because the raw numbers are striking and the caveats are just as striking.

In a 180-day trial, 60 adults with self-perceived thinning hair were randomized to a proprietary saw palmetto extract or placebo (40 active, 20 placebo). Terminal hair count changed by +18.6 in the active group versus -10.1 in placebo (p<0.001), and density changed by +25.1 versus -12.2 (p<0.001). No treatment-related adverse events were reported [20].

Now the caveats, all of which come from the paper itself and the surrounding literature:

• It is a single-author study.
• The extract is a proprietary, industry-supplied ingredient, so the result attaches to that specific preparation, not to saw palmetto in general.
• The sample was small at 40 active and 20 placebo.

The stronger use case is as an add-on. A real-life multicenter trial of 225 subjects over six months tested a supplement containing Serenoa repens, Cucurbita pepo, L-cystine, and vitamin C alongside minoxidil or finasteride. Investigator-rated "great improvement" reached 36.5 percent in the add-on group against 25 percent in the drug-only group (p=0.04) [21].

A network meta-analysis of off-label options for male androgenetic alopecia ranked topical minoxidil 5 percent as most effective and placed topical saw palmetto among the options with potential benefit [22]. A separate network meta-analysis of 19 randomized trials and 1,658 patients with androgenetic alopecia examined 16 supplements, with nutraceutical blends, apple extract, tocotrienols, and pumpkin seed oil among those outperforming placebo [29].

Grade: Moderate, and best as an adjunct. If you are already on a prescription regimen with your doctor, this is the supplement category with the most defensible reason to be in the conversation.

Beyond the Headline Nutrients: Amino Acids and Protein

Amino Acids and a Note on Protein

Hair is largely protein, and its structure depends on specific amino acids. Cysteine and methionine are sulfur-containing precursors in keratin formation, and taurine appears alongside them in the supplement formulas that showed benefit in trials [18].

The most useful piece of science here is about where nutrients actually go. A study of intermediate hair follicles from women with female pattern hair loss found that affected follicles had decreased essential amino acids and vitamins and a more quiescent metabolic profile. Crucially, their nutrient uptake mechanisms were intact [24]. In plain terms: the follicle is short on supplies but still able to absorb them, which is a reasonable rationale for nutritional support as an add-on rather than a replacement for treatment.

One further preliminary signal belongs here. In a 90-day randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 100 healthy adults took a once-daily spermidine-based supplement. The treated group gained anagen phase follicles, and the pull test stayed negative in all of them, against 68 percent positive in the placebo group. The authors called the result preliminary and asked for work in specific clinical settings [23].

Do not overlook the basics. Adequate total protein and adequate calorie intake come before any supplement. Aggressive dieting is a well-recognized trigger for telogen effluvium, and no capsule compensates for a diet that is short on protein.

What Can Make Hair Loss Worse

More is not better. Two nutrients are worth flagging because excess can work against you.

• Vitamin A excess. Oversupplementation is associated with hair shedding [25].
• Selenium excess. The same applies, and the margin between a useful intake and a harmful one is narrow [25]. One 90-patient chronic telogen effluvium study also found selenium significantly higher in cases than in controls [9].

A dermatology review on diet and hair loss puts it directly: patients should be told that research on supplementing in the absence of a deficiency is lacking, and that some supplements carry the risk of worsening hair loss or the risk of toxicity [25]. That is the argument for testing before treating, not after.

There is a metabolic angle too. A study of 200 men aged 18 to 35 with early-onset androgenetic alopecia found insulin resistance (HOMA-IR of 2.7 or higher) in 18 percent of them against 4 percent of controls (p=0.003), and metabolic syndrome in 21 percent against 9 percent (p=0.011) [31]. Early patterned thinning in young men can be a visible marker of something worth screening. That is a conversation for a physician, and it is a more valuable one than another bottle of gummies.

Lifestyle patterns show up in the data as well. A survey of 1,507 male university students found an early-onset prevalence of 19.2 percent, with positive family history, low vegetable and fruit intake, higher red meat intake, and smoking all associated with increased risk [33]. These are associations rather than causes, but they point in the same direction as the metabolic findings.

How Supplements Compare With Minoxidil and Finasteride

Calibration matters. If you want to know how much a supplement can reasonably do, compare it against the pharmaceutical and device options that have been measured with the same yardstick.

A systematic review and continuous Bayesian network meta-analysis reported terminal hairs per square centimeter gained at 24 weeks. In women: a multi-component natural product formulation at 30.09, low-level laser therapy at 16.62, minoxidil 5 percent at 10.82, and a single nutraceutical supplement at 7.32. In men: the same multi-component natural product formulation at 21.03, low-level laser therapy at 18.75, minoxidil 5 percent at 13.13, and finasteride at 12.38. The authors of that analysis concluded that low-level laser therapy appeared more efficacious than the pharmaceuticals, that the multi-component natural product showed better efficacy across all tested parameters, and that in men finasteride and minoxidil 2 percent were not statistically different from placebo [26].

Device evidence is consistent with that. A meta-analysis of 38 studies and 3,098 patients, most of them with androgenetic alopecia, found a significant increase in hair density with low-level laser and LED therapy versus placebo, with a standardized mean difference of 1.44 beyond 20 weeks [27].

Read those numbers side by side and the honest picture is messier than either camp claims. Low-level laser therapy outperformed the drugs in that analysis, and one multi-component oral product posted the best numbers of all. What none of them did was identify in advance who would respond. That is why the strongest position for an oral supplement is as an adjunct alongside a treatment plan a doctor oversees, and not as a substitute for one.

That is not a reason to skip nutrition. It is a reason to place it correctly.

The Lab Panel Worth Asking For

Before buying anything, ask your doctor for a baseline panel. Each test answers a specific question.

• Complete blood count (CBC). Screens for anemia, which can accompany diffuse shedding.
• Serum ferritin. Measures iron stores, the one marker with real numbers behind it in this category [5][8].
• 25-hydroxyvitamin D. The standard vitamin D status test [12].
• TSH and free T4. Thyroid dysfunction is a treatable cause of shedding worth ruling out, though the 90-patient chronic TE study found no thyroid difference between cases and controls [9].
• Fasting glucose or HbA1c. Justified by the insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome findings in early-onset patterned thinning [31].

Test first, then supplement. It is the difference between correcting a documented deficiency and guessing.

Dosing and Timeline

Here is what the trials actually used. Doses and durations vary, and in several cases no established dose exists for hair outcomes.

The timeline expectation is fixed by biology, not by the product.

1. Months 0 to 3. Nothing measurable. Hair already committed to shedding has to leave first [30].
2. Month 3. The earliest point at which a change is plausible.
3. Month 6. The fair judging point. This is where most trials measured their outcomes [15][16][21].
4. Month 6 and beyond. If there is no change, stop. Discontinue what is not working rather than adding another bottle.

The Bottom Line

Correcting a documented deficiency is the use of a hair supplement with the clearest evidence behind it. If your ferritin is low, your vitamin D is low, or your thyroid is off, addressing that with a clinician is well grounded and worth doing.

Everything else sits lower on the ladder. Marine protein and collagen blends have moderate, mostly industry-funded support. Saw palmetto has promising numbers and real caveats, with its best evidence as an add-on. Zinc helps if you are deficient and does not move the needle if you are not. Biotin, the most popular ingredient in the category, has the weakest support and a genuine lab-interference problem.

Notice one pattern running through this entire article: the nutrients with the clearest evidence behind them are the ones you were short on, while the ones with the weakest evidence are sold as though everyone needs them. Test first.

That is the same order the Agape team uses when a customer asks which hair supplement to buy: read the labs, then choose the nutrient that is actually short.

What We Recommend

Everything above points to one conclusion: the best-supported use of a hair supplement is correcting a deficiency a blood test has actually confirmed. Confirm that with your doctor first, particularly for iron, where excess is harmful and the dose belongs to your clinician. The picks below are the ones we carry that match the best-evidenced nutrients in this article, plus the collagen and marine protein category, which has the most hair-relevant trials in the set.

Every product above is stocked by Agape Nutrition, and none of them replaces the blood test that tells you which one, if any, you need.

Frequently Asked Questions

References

1. Yelich A, Jenkins H, Holt S, Miller R. Biotin for Hair Loss: Teasing Out the Evidence. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11324195/
2. Dasgupta A. Immunoassay design and biotin interference. Adv Clin Chem. 2022. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35953126/
3. Cervantes A, Daley SF. Biotin Deficiency. StatPearls. 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31613531/
4. Chiu KC, et al. Biotin interference in routine clinical immunoassays. Pract Lab Med. 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12099460/
5. Thamotharan N, et al. Assessment of Serum Ferritin Levels in Female Patients With Telogen Effluvium. Cureus. 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12839778/
6. Soutou B, et al. Iron Supplementation May Improve the Patient's Level of Satisfaction in Not-Low-Ferritin Telogen Effluvium: A Real-Life Observational Study. Indian J Dermatol. 2024. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38841243/
7. Ahmed A, et al. Association between Serum Trace Elements and Telogen Effluvium: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Skin Appendage Disord. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42077991/
8. Zhang D, LaSenna C, Shields BE. Serum Ferritin Levels: A Clinical Guide in Patients With Hair Loss. Cutis. 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37820340/
9. Durusu Turkoglu IN, et al. A comprehensive investigation of biochemical status in patients with telogen effluvium: Analysis of Hb, ferritin, vitamin B12, vitamin D, thyroid function tests, zinc, copper, biotin, and selenium levels. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11626366/
10. Liran O, et al. Hair Loss and Zinc Deficiency: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare (Basel). 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12652007/
11. Lalosevic J, et al. Serum Zinc Concentration in Patients with Alopecia Areata. Acta Derm Venereol. 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10561101/
12. El-Tatawy RA, et al. Oral Vitamin D Treatment in Patients with Telogen Effluvium: Clinical and Dermoscopic Evaluation. Int J Trichology. 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11335050/
13. Guan L, et al. The role of vitamin D receptor signaling in hair follicle health and alopecia: Current understanding and therapeutic implications. J Cell Commun Signal. 2026. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12747802/
14. Kim TK, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Low-Molecular-Weight Collagen Peptide GT for Improving Hair Condition in Individuals with Damaged Hair: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Int J Stem Cells. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42624827/
15. Ablon G. A 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the ability of a marine complex supplement to promote hair growth in men with thinning hair. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2016. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27506633/
16. Ablon G, Kogan S. A Six-Month, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of a Nutraceutical Supplement for Promoting Hair Growth in Women With Self-Perceived Thinning Hair. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29742189/
17. Ablon G, Kogan S. A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study of a Nutraceutical Supplement for Promoting Hair Growth in Perimenopausal, Menopausal, and Postmenopausal Women With Thinning Hair. J Drugs Dermatol. 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33400421/
18. Milani M, Colombo F. Efficacy and tolerability of an oral supplement containing amino acids, iron, selenium, and marine hydrolyzed collagen in subjects with hair loss (androgenetic alopecia, AGA or FAGA or telogen effluvium). A prospective, randomized, 3-month, controlled, assessor-blinded study. Skin Res Technol. 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10240182/
19. Bassila C, Bassila JC, Slim M. Efficacy and safety of hydrolyzed collagen supplementation on skin health outcomes: a systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42342959/
20. Ablon G. The Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Saw Palmetto (Serenoa repens) Extract for Promoting Hair Growth in Adults With Self-Perceived Thinning Hair: 180-Day Results. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2026. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12881706/
21. Milani M, Alfano S. Impact of a Novel Dietary Supplement on Efficacy of Pharmacological Treatments for Androgenic Alopecia: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Randomized, Assessor-Blinded Trial on 225 Subjects. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12376952/
22. Gupta AK, et al. Beyond Minoxidil: Off-Label Therapies for Male Androgenetic Alopecia-A Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analyses. Medicina (Kaunas). 2026. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13414076/
23. Rinaldi F, et al. A spermidine-based nutritional supplement prolongs the anagen phase of hair follicles in humans: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718121/
24. Piccini I, et al. Intermediate Hair Follicles from Patients with Female Pattern Hair Loss Are Associated with Nutrient Insufficiency and a Quiescent Metabolic Phenotype. Nutrients. 2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9416027/
25. Guo EL, Katta R. Diet and hair loss: effects of nutrient deficiency and supplement use. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5315033/
26. Feldman PR, et al. Hair regrowth treatment efficacy and resistance in androgenetic alopecia: A systematic review and continuous Bayesian network meta-analysis. Front Med. 2022. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9900126/
27. Low-Level Laser and LED Therapy in Alopecia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Dermatol Surg. 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39404126/
28. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Commercial Oral Supplements for Hair Growth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2026. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13063204/
29. Zhou L, Zhu W, Chen Y. Effects of dietary supplements on androgenetic alopecia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Front Nutr. 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12812558/
30. Augustyniak A, Mc Mahon H. Dietary marine-derived ingredients for stimulating hair cell cycle. Biomed Pharmacother. 2023. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37156114/
31. Erden O, Yorulmaz A, Yalcin B. Increased Prevalence of Insulin Resistance and Metabolic Syndrome in Men With Early-Onset Androgenetic Alopecia: A Case-Control Study. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12661465/
32. Bas Y, et al. Prevalence and types of androgenetic alopecia in north Anatolian population: A community-based study. J Pak Med Assoc. 2015. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26228320/
33. Agaoglu E, et al. Prevalence of early-onset androgenetic alopecia and its relationship with lifestyle and dietary habits. Ital J Dermatol Venereol. 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33913667/
34. Bilik L, Kokcam I, Esen M. Evaluation of the relationship of digital phototrichogram findings of patients with diffuse hair loss with blood TSH, ferritin and vitamin B12 levels. North Clin Istanb. 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10861425/
35. Daniells S, Hardy G. Hair loss in long-term or home parenteral nutrition: are micronutrient deficiencies to blame? Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20823774/