You damn well know that you're being dishonest. Permanent ED is not a side effect. It never happened in any official study or any trial for Propecia. They can't list something as a side effect just because random people are complaining about it.
How am I being dishonest when quoting from official sources here?
The drug is documented to affect erectile function and has been stated as such by the manufacturer. The regulatory agencies now list permanent ED as a reported side effect in post-marketing use.
The fact this has been listed at all, in official documentation from official regulatory agencies, should be of concern to you -- but clearly it's not as you choose to deny that this problem could potentially occur from the drug's usage, based on the argument that such side effects never came up during Propecia clinical trials.
Those FDA clinical trials were in 1997. New studies have come out since then about the fact that the exact mechanism(s) behind 5ARI-related sexual dysfunction remains UNKNOWN. Additionally, we don't know if Merck or the FDA followed up longterm on the trial participants to assess their hormonal profile/erectile function weeks/months later. And, Merck doesn't exactly have the best track record in being forthcoming about the truth or revealing how harmful their drugs are to the public (Vioxx, Gardasil, Singulair cases etc).
Fact is, we can only make decisions based on the information we are given. We now have additional information from official sources since those clinical trials took place, that in certain cases, persistent erectile dysfunction despite discontinuation is a reported possible outcome from use. Even though they don't know how frequently the issue occurs, it is now in officially published documents. If you choose to ignore this fact/risk, that's your choice.
It's actually a relief to me. I don't care what this agency think about something that is not not proven or backed by medical evidence. I have the ability myself to hear people complain on the internet.
Thank you for confirming you choose to ignore official information -- again, this is your personal opinion, choosing to ignore the fact that this problem has been reported enough that they have been forced to investigate it, and force Merck to comply with adding the warning to the product insert. If you choose to ignore this because it wasn't "documented in an official FDA Clinical Trial", as if to dismiss the problem even exists -- that's entirely your prerogative, although in my opinion extremely naive. Hopefully you won't experience the problem should you ever quit.
People can say anything. I have heard some absolutely ridiculous claims about finasteride side effects that are clearly untrue. I know there are hypochondriacs out there that have the ability to write emails and make phone calls to these agencies. I think it's interesting how no one suffered permanent side effects in any official, randomized trials.
Of course people can say anything, but the agencies aren't going to take Merck to task over some random hypochondriacs submitting God knows what claims. Persistent erectile dysfunction has obviously been reported enough to the agencies, likely via submitted reports from medical professionals and consumers alike, that they finally took action to investigate further and ensure the warning was put in the product inserts. That's their job, to look out for consumer (yours and ours) safety, clinical study or not.
The fact is, the warning is published by official agencies. For me, that's more than enough evidence this problem does exist. For you, obviously not. So we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
Finasteride is a drug that helps a lot of people. Even if it did cause permanent side-effects in very rare circumstances (Less than 1/1500 says the clinical trials), it can still be taken by people with hairloss.
The problem is the possibility of permanent side effects was never listed by the manufacturer -- it took the regulatory agencies investigation to force them to add it. Merck would never acknowledge this fact because any rational man would likely avoid the drug if they knew there was a chance, however slim, of permanent ED from use, and sales would suffer as a result.
Anyway, you can keep pretending such side effects do not exist if it makes you feel better, simply because it wasn't listed back in 1997 when they did the FDA trials at that time. For those who value their sexual performance, this warning will make them think twice about what they may be risking to save some hair, based on an unknown risk percentage and reports from former users of the drug.
