Propecia in reality

Bismarck

Senior Member
Reaction score
3
Interesting how the results differ from the "original" Propecia study:

Follow-up of 1 mg finasteride treatment of male pattern baldness-difference between clinical trials and private office follow-up: influences on prescribing habits evaluated.

Rapaport MJ.

UCLA, Los Angeles, California 90210, USA. Sknbevhill@aol.com

BACKGROUND: Finasteride (Propecia) was approved by the FDA in 1998 for treating men with androgenetic alopecia. The published clinical trials demonstrated statistical differences between drug and placebo. Rarely do new drugs undergo further non-drug-company-sponsored studies of efficacy. Concerns about clinical studies and marketing of drugs prompted this evaluation of a large group of patients taking this medication. OBJECTIVE: Finasteride usage offered an opportunity not only to understand the acceptance of a cosmetically oriented medication, but also to evaluate subjective comments and compliance after a long period of time. METHODS: A total of 1261 patients were monitored with phone calls every 3 months after finasteride was initially prescribed. After 12 months, a detailed questionnaire was sent to all patients with an additional letter and two telephone calls if no response was received. Statistical analysis of the patients' data was made. RESULTS: Thirty-two percent or 414 men continued to take finasteride daily for 1 to 3 years. Twenty-four percent or 297 men discontinued the drug between 3 and 15 months owing to poor results. The remaining 44% or 549 men were lost to follow-up despite numerous attempts to contact them. CONCLUSION: A total of 414 men continued to take the medication, but only 211 returned detailed questionnaires. A small percentage of this group felt that they grew hair. The remaining patients noted poor results.
 

worried

Established Member
Reaction score
0
Perhaps these people were expecting too much from propecia? I mean, isn't it described as more of a "maintainence(sp?)" drug instead of a growth stimulant? Perhaps there "poor results" were maintainence.
 

Bismarck

Senior Member
Reaction score
3
worried said:
Perhaps these people were expecting too much from propecia? I mean, isn't it described as more of a "maintainence(sp?)" drug instead of a growth stimulant? Perhaps there "poor results" were maintainence.

Yes. I completely agree.
Just wanted to point out that the bottomline is: "Don't expect wonders with propecia".

bis
 

Buffboy

Established Member
Reaction score
1
It's a well known fact that you are your own worst critic. If these guys weren't taking pictures, it's impossible to tell already after a year. You stare at the mirror everyday, making it impossible to remember how you looked a year ago. This "scientific" study was carried out through phone calls :lol: and a questionarie. That's embarrasing, really. The Propecia study by Merck was done with the assistance of doctors, pictures, hair counts etc.

I give NOTHING for this study.

But I agree with Bismarck: Don't expect miracles.
 

Pirate Commander F.B.

Established Member
Reaction score
1
My thoughts exactly, Buffboy. Self-evaluation, 44% of subjects went missing. That equals unreliable information.

On the other hand, it's always safer not to expect anything. That way you can't ever be dissapointed with the results.
 

Odelay

Established Member
Reaction score
7
Unless a group of dermatologists inspected the guys before and after a year on Propecia then this study makes no difference and might as well never occured.
 
G

Guest

Guest
prehaps one of the worst studies I have seen in a long time, 24% did not finish the trial and 44% went missing, hardly conclusive!

But I agree with the general point, finasteride will not grow you a whole tree of hair, the results will always be 'poor' rarely a noticable cosmetic improvement, but growing a little extra hair will always be better than losing a lot of hair.
 

Old Baldy

Senior Member
Reaction score
1
Really, I wouldn't even call that a study. The results with people that stick with it is what I want to see. Not some wimps that take something for free and jump ship.

Probably Democrats Tynan. :wink:
 

Axon

Senior Member
Reaction score
9
Was this double blind?

Additionally, Finasteride is not a stimulant...
 

Wanker

Member
Reaction score
0
Yeah i agree. pretty much meaningless. Now if they discontnued due to the continued loss in actual haircount thats different. I think its pretty much established fact that propecia is effective. When i first read this post i thought it was going to be regarding sexual side effects. If that was the case it would have weight, because thats completely subjective and can not be measured. (Thank god thats not what is was about, i'm already reluctant to use it as is...)
 

ACT10Npack

Experienced Member
Reaction score
0
If they going to do a study on Propecia or any type of hair loss drug. A phone call with the result is not a scienitific test. They should have send photos in everyone or even better. Go to the place and let the people who started the test take the photos. Also, just because people are not see hair regrowth does not mean it's not working. Most people who use Propecia maintain the hair they have. People that start taking and stop it didn't see results and stop taking thinking it's not working. Also, they would result in a short period of time which Propecia will not do.
 
Top