Does propecia make you tired?
- Thread starter muaythai187
- Start date
muaythai187
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1
I just take propecia at night that way it doesn't interfere with my workouts in the morning. Whats up with all the tension in this forum?
muaythai187
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1
I just take propecia at night that way it doesn't interfere with my workouts in the morning. Whats up with all the tension in the forum?
jakeb said:
Maybe you are working our more than you were actually doing before, or simply now have a better regimen which maximises muscle gain. My understanding is that T, not DHT, plays the key role in muscle development. There are various supplements marketed at bodybuilders which purport to "block" DHT, like Novedex XT.
jakeb
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Most of the side effects of Propecia are associated with low testosterone, not DHT. Maybe the rise in free testosterone that happens when it can't convert to DHT causes the body to downregulate testosterone production in some guys. I have no idea.
I'm not telling people not to use it. Heck, I wish I could use it. Everyone should try it... you probably won't get the effects that I did. But I have zero doubt in my mind that Finasteride no longer agrees with me.
I'm not telling people not to use it. Heck, I wish I could use it. Everyone should try it... you probably won't get the effects that I did. But I have zero doubt in my mind that Finasteride no longer agrees with me.
muaythai187
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1
Hey Bubka its true that the time of day doesn't matter but training in the morning is very important to me , I notice when I started to take it in the morning it just made feel sleepy and tired. People who have different reactions to prescription drugs but now its better for me take it at night so it doesn't coincide with my morning workouts.
muaythai187
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1
I always been healthy and never taken any medications except for finasteride. So only you would know how your body would react to a medication if you are experience side effects because people who have different reactions to a prescription drug. When I took finasteride didn't really absorbed all the negative aspects or reviews of the drug because if I did I knew I would probably think about it happening to my body. About Merks 2% gets sides statement thats probably true from their case study but people have different reactions to medications. So far I'm happy with the results of propecia for now , I have been taking it two weeks now and it has stop my daily shedding. Hopefully I don't have to experience the shedding phase but not going to be disappointed if propecia doesn't work just going move on with my life and proceed with the next battle for hairloss. Plus there's more important things in life you can think about than your hair.
Rambo said:
And what representative sample did you base your complete guess on? :roll:
Dude, we have a 'model' for finasteride - the pseudohermaphrodites with 5AR2 deficiency. Aside from the genital development issues caused by their lack of DHT in early life, no other clinical abnormalities have been reported for this group of people.
jakeb
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 0
Everyone brings up the pseudohermaphrodites... but Finasteride doesn't make you a pseudohermaphrodite. It is a new substance you are introducing into your body in hopes that it will reduce DHT. It may do other, unintended things along the way.
Saying Finasteride shouldn't give you problems because pseudohermaphrodies don't have problems is missing the point.
Saying Finasteride shouldn't give you problems because pseudohermaphrodies don't have problems is missing the point.
jakeb said:
But finasteride transforms your hormonal profile to one similar to a pseudohermaphrodite. That's the point.
Finasteride is just a 5AR inhibitor; all of the effects, positive and negative, are related to the hormonal changes induced by the drug. Beyond its inhibition of 5AR2 finasteride has no androgenic, antiandrogenic, estrogenic, antiestrogenic, or progestational effects.Go see Michael Moore's "Sicko", then watch "The Corporation". Drug companies are a business, and people are their bank machines. If a few die along the way, oh well.
And BTW Pondle, have you had a look through any of the studies on Propeciahelp.com?
You do realize Finasteride has been found to cross the blood brain barrier, and has been recovered in the Cerbral Spinal Fluid of subjects taking it within 10 days, right?
Despite what you think, it does more than just "alter hormones". Frankly, I'm not sure why you are so adamant on defending this drug, its like you are paid by Merck to be here, constantly reciting the 2% statistic... one that studies published on the aforementioned forum have shown to be, interestingly, higher than 2%.
And BTW Pondle, have you had a look through any of the studies on Propeciahelp.com?
You do realize Finasteride has been found to cross the blood brain barrier, and has been recovered in the Cerbral Spinal Fluid of subjects taking it within 10 days, right?
Despite what you think, it does more than just "alter hormones". Frankly, I'm not sure why you are so adamant on defending this drug, its like you are paid by Merck to be here, constantly reciting the 2% statistic... one that studies published on the aforementioned forum have shown to be, interestingly, higher than 2%.
Drug companies are indeed businesses, but they operate within a regulatory framework - that's capitalism! I don't think the alternative economic models worked any better, did they? 8) If no-one was prepared to risk their capital in pursuit of profit, we'd have no drug treatments of any sort, indeed no products and services of any kind whatsoever.
I'm not here to 'big up' Merck, I just don't think scare-mongering helps anyone. Criticising the trials because Merck funded them is just intellectual laziness. Criticising the trials because of some flaw in the methodology would be more credible, but I haven't seen anyone on here make that kind of critique of the Proscar, Propecia or Avodart trials. Citing studies based on enormous doses thousands of times the normal human dose, in animals with different metabolisms and physiologies, isn't a sensible way to evaluate the drug. Of course finasteride will do some damage in a totally massive dose, many compounds could! The bottom line for me is that finasteride has a 15 year record of relatively safe use in hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of men.
I'm not here to 'big up' Merck, I just don't think scare-mongering helps anyone. Criticising the trials because Merck funded them is just intellectual laziness. Criticising the trials because of some flaw in the methodology would be more credible, but I haven't seen anyone on here make that kind of critique of the Proscar, Propecia or Avodart trials. Citing studies based on enormous doses thousands of times the normal human dose, in animals with different metabolisms and physiologies, isn't a sensible way to evaluate the drug. Of course finasteride will do some damage in a totally massive dose, many compounds could! The bottom line for me is that finasteride has a 15 year record of relatively safe use in hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of men.
Rambo said:
I somehow doubt that the safety and efficacy of a hairloss drug has ever played a huge role in American politics.
I am sure that somebody would eventually come forward as a whistleblower if there was wrong-doing either in the conduct of the trials or the regulatory assessment process, or that there would be some other form of expose. With all the journals, interest groups, academics and corporate rivals out there, plenty of people would have an interest in embarrassing Merck, the FDA or Big Pharma in general, and it's kinda hard to keep these things covered up for years in a democracy. 8)
You know UK citizens have to be careful about making these kinds of allegations of corporate or personal misconduct. If I was doing it here I could get my *** sued off for libel or defamation.
Rambo said:
Your opinions are your own concern, but to express them in a forum on the Internet is another matter. You're probably protected by the US First Amendment, but here in the UK under our law (Defamation Act 1996) any trading corporation can bring defamation proceedings where someone makes an untrue statement - in this case, allegations of misconduct and illegality - that damages its business or trading reputation. The law is the law, the only question is whether a claim is brought or not.
I'm happy for you that you feel comfortable throwing around potentially libellous accusations :lol:
But if you want to make a credible point and have a mature argument with the grown-ups it's not enough to throw around totally unfounded allegations of professional misconduct and illegality.
There may indeed be various ways that many pharmaceutical companies are letting down patients, and society at large, in the drug development and clinical trial sphere, including ‘duff trials’ that are poorly designed.
But you don't have anything to say about this, because it doesn't seem like you've looked at the methodology, and perhaps you don't know anything about scientific method anyway.
You just say that we couldn't discover the 'truth' about the trials because of some 'conspiracy' between "the politicians" and Merck which has suppressed all the evidence... (funny how this supposed conspiracy never prevented the New England Journal of Medicine from making allegations about Merck's conduct of the Vioxx trials).
This just shows how ridiculous this thread - and you - have both become. :roll:
But if you want to make a credible point and have a mature argument with the grown-ups it's not enough to throw around totally unfounded allegations of professional misconduct and illegality.
There may indeed be various ways that many pharmaceutical companies are letting down patients, and society at large, in the drug development and clinical trial sphere, including ‘duff trials’ that are poorly designed.
But you don't have anything to say about this, because it doesn't seem like you've looked at the methodology, and perhaps you don't know anything about scientific method anyway.
You just say that we couldn't discover the 'truth' about the trials because of some 'conspiracy' between "the politicians" and Merck which has suppressed all the evidence... (funny how this supposed conspiracy never prevented the New England Journal of Medicine from making allegations about Merck's conduct of the Vioxx trials).
This just shows how ridiculous this thread - and you - have both become. :roll:
muaythai187
Established Member
- Reaction score
- 1
I have notice in this forum that everytime you experience negative sides about propecia they will tell you its all in your all in your mind but the best thing to do is go to all experience dermatologist and inform him about the sides your getting. I went to see my dermatologist today and he informed me that even though it wasn't reported as one of the sides when the pill was studied but a lot of his patients has reported desame problem.