Propecia made my weiner fall off.
- Thread starter cuebald
- Start date
decro435
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 22
It might not make your weiner fall off, but the side effects are definetly real and can be very strong in some people. Understand that we all react different to treatments, I couldn't get an erection and my ejaculate decreased by 70% it was frightening and real especially at 18.
amsch
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 1
Yeah, but I'd rather have a bloated face that goes away 1-2 weeks after quitting than an irreversible gyno.finfighter said:Actually thats not true, I experianced bad side effects from minoxidil-bloated face dark circles, under eyes, heart palpatations- but I still recomend minoxidil because I know that I was in the minority of bad responders to this drug, conversly, if I developed side effects from propecia, I would be in th 2% minority and I would not expect these sides for most.amsch said:If you got gynecomastia, you wouldn't be recommending this drug all the time. So shut up and be happy about not having side effects!finfighter said:
Hope you get what I mean.
decro435
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 22
Obsidian said:
My erections have, but I'm getting increasingly annoying testicular pain. My ejaculate is decreasing even more and I feel that I might be getting Gyno.
So, for all you guys who don't get side effects, lay off the rest of us. The sides are real for some. I don't have a clue why that effect me and not you guys.
ali777
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 4
finfighter said:
No one is using scare tactics. We share our experiences and people are free to make their own decisions.
I think everyone who wants to use finastride should have a go for at least a month. If sides do not subside after a month or so, the wisest thing to do is to give it up.
I have tried it, it didn't work for me. Does that mean I can't share my experiences?
finfighter said:Actually thats not true, I experianced bad side effects from minoxidil-bloated face dark circles, under eyes, heart palpatations- but I still recomend minoxidil because I know that I was in the minority of bad responders to this drug, conversly, if I developed side effects from propecia, I would be in th 2% minority and I would not expect these sides for most.amsch said:If you got gynecomastia, you wouldn't be recommending this drug all the time. So shut up and be happy about not having side effects!finfighter said:
Minoxidil side-effects are much easier to live with, but there is a major trade off there as well. Some of us are forced to make a choice between bloated face and hair on fertilizers.
The bloated face thing is not so bad, but some days it used to make me look like I haven't slept for a whole week. Most of the time I didn't even notice it.
Overall, I'd rather lose my hair than the shape of my face. I need my face for the money shot :whistle:
treeshrew
Experienced Member
- Reaction score
- 0
finfighter said:
Man, I've had a good experience on finasteride and always encourage people to just try it, but you are like some crazy insane finasteride crusader! Why do you care so much?
Anyway, fact is some people, a very small percent, do get hideous side effects from this drug, and Merck should acknowledge those people and help them out.
The far majority experience no side effects, and I agree that some people probably get self induced side effects (if you ever want to test this, look up Bryan's muffin placebo test).
Anyway, if you've had a good experience on finasteride, great, share it, but it affects everyone differently so there is always that tiny risk!
My advice to finasteride newbies is get blood drawn before you start taking the drug so if something does go haywire you'll have a better idea why.
Here.
------------------
Link to article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=19090946
Abstract below:
J Sex Med. 2008 Dec;5(12):2917-24.
5-alpha reductase inhibitors and erectile dysfunction: the connection.
Erdemir F, Harbin A, Hellstrom WJ.
Tulane University-Department of Urology, New Orleans, LA, USA.
INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common problem affecting middle-aged and elderly men. First-line medical therapy includes alpha 1blockers and 5alpha-reductase inhibitors (5ARIs), such as finasteride and dutasteride. 5ARI use has been associated with adverse sexual outcomes, including erectile dysfunction (ED), ejaculatory dysfunction (EjD), and decreased libido.
AIM: To clarify the association between sexual adverse effects (AEs) and 5ARIs through review of literature concerning 5ARIs and to review the proposed mechanisms of these effects.
METHODS: A comprehensive literature review, using MEDLINE and PUBMED search engines, was conducted for all publications concerning 5ARIs and sexual AEs.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Sexual adverse effects, such as ED, EjD, and decreased libido, were the measured outcomes of this literature review.
RESULTS: Sexual AEs are reported in clinical trials at rates of 2.1% to 38%. The most common sexual AE is ED, followed by EjD and decreased libido. These effects occur early in therapy and attenuate over time. A proposed mechanism for sexual dysfunction involves decreased nitric oxide synthase activity due to decreased dihydrotestosterone.
CONCLUSIONS: The connection between 5ARIs and sexual dysfunction is apparent upon review of the literature. Though theories have been proposed, little is known about the exact mechanisms behind 5ARI-related sexual dysfunction.
Since the connection between 5ARIs and sexual AEs is established in the literature, future research should be directed toward deciphering the pathophysiologic mechanisms.
When more basic science knowledge is attained in this area, the focus can shift toward prevention and treatment.
PMID: 19090946
1. First of all, seems you've conveniently forgotten that Finasteride has a near FLAT DOSE RESPONSE such that it doesn't matter wether one takes 0.04mg or 5mg, inhibition of DHT is NEARLY IDENTICAL due to Finasteride's extreme potency against the 5AR2 enzyme.
See:
viewtopic.php?p=503661#p503661
http://www.physics.upenn.edu/people/fra ... index.html
2. As noted in the abstract:
METHODS: A comprehensive literature review, using MEDLINE and PUBMED search engines, was conducted for all publications concerning 5ARIs and sexual AEs.
This was a systematic and comprehensive literature review on all published studies. They didn't just make these numbers up themselves, they were pulled from OTHER trials and research studies done over the years.
3. If you choose to bury your head in the sand and ignore the conclusions a multitude of highly-qualified medical researchers and scientists have come to about Finasteride, it's mechanisms of action and potential for side effects, just so you'll feel better about taking the drug and ignoring any potential risks that come with it -- then go right ahead, whatever makes you feel better when you sleep at night. It's your body, your health and your life. But for you to just sit there and discount the conclusions that medical professionals far more qualified than either of us have come to, is quite simply laughable.
Go ahead, continue to hold onto your "2%" FDA and Merck stastistic which was conducted back in the late 90s, if it makes you feel better... time marches on, it's now 2009, and more and more research has come out since the FDA trials (such as the above paper from 2008) which continues to find the drug has mechanisms of action and potential negative effects far beyond what was submitted to the FDA by Merck back in the day.
Are you seriously suggesting you're going to discount every piece of research that has come out since then simply because it wasn't part of the original Propecia FDA trials? Only a fool or corporate schill would hold this type of "selective vision" and biased attitude towards the promotion of their own product, at all costs. Many drugs have been "FDA" approved, only to later be pulled from the market due to negative side effects, new research, and unlisted mechanisms of action. Time will tell what happens with Finasteride.
In the meantime, have fun popping your pills.
You obviously did not read the links I provided and again, are choosing to ignore published scientific fact about how Finasteride operates in terms of near flat dose response, in order to fit your selective vision and disinformation agenda.
Also, just FYI -- wether or not his opinion matters to you or not, Bryan has stated many times that Finasteride at lower dosages is "nearly" as effective as 5mg due to the near flat dose response of the drug.
The above does not apply to Finasteride due to it's near flat dose response rate.
See above.
From 1998 : http://www.physics.upenn.edu/people/fra ... index.html
-------------
"Conclusions:
The FDA has approved a drug for which there are no long term studies that relate to sexually adverse effects, and their correlations, a drug that must be taken for a lifetime by young men who wish to retain their hair. (Of course, the knowledgable user can decide for himself whether he wishes to take the negative risks, but there are no warnings in the drug insert that only longer term tests can predict the probabilities and severity of the various adverse side effects and that the potential user should take this into consideration.)
The data on the dosage dependence of the depression of conversion to DHT, reproduced in this report from the material obtained under the FOIA, does not appear in the medical literature or in the drug insert. Thus the fact that the dosage has been set by the manufacturer at a level far larger than the level measured as necessary for the main function, has not been reported publicly. Yet, the vastly lower dosages, reported in the data submitted to the FDA, would be expected to reduce the chance of side effects.
Unfortunately, nothing is found in the FDA reviews of the request for approval of PROPECIA, commenting on the renarkable dosage data reproduced in this note. "
-------------
Note "vastly lower dosages" would be around 0.05mg or below (impossible to obtain commercially).
No worries, but I'm not really here to debate for "fun".
I typically only respond to what I consider to be blatant skewing or ignoring of published facts on how the medication works, in order to promote a Pro-finasteride agenda with absolutely no regard for the potential or risk of side effects from use (ie, blanket statements like "Finasteride doesn't cause side effects").
And what might I ask brought about this change of mind?
I can understand the concern over losing hair, but really in the grand scheme of life, looks and vanity are not everything. And I say this because I know how you feel, because I myself thought the exact same way until I paid a dear price by getting screwed by this drug, and ultimately, Merck.
Unfortunately for guys that end up with ongoing side effects and health issues from medications like Finasteride, it often takes devastating changes like that to really put things in perspective... about what's important in life -- health or hair -- and the quality of that life.
Note I'm not arguing with you over the fact that Finasteride is the best option to retain one's hair -- I totally agree with you. But Merck needs to be more forthcoming about the true percentage of risk, unlisted mechanisms of action, and possibility -- however rare -- that side effects may not resolve after quitting.
Yes, of course you could do that. But the point is, Merck is making claims about their drug that unfortunately are simply untrue for a certain unlucky portion of men, and are not telling the whole truth about how it operates.
ALL men considering Finasteride deserve the truth, in order to make a properly informed decision before taking the medication, to weigh the true risks/side effects and pros/cons of the drug vs their overall health.
Anyway, I hope you can see where I'm coming from. I don't think anyone would disagree with wanting to know MORE about the medication they are taking, and that's the point here.
Finfighter, i got nothin but love for you bro. If i didn't care about people i simply wouldn't be posting my experiences or posting AT ALL. Same goes for Mew, he's coming from a good place and im sure he wouldnt want anybody else to suffer what he (any many others) are going through for every single f*****g day of their lives. He's posting alot of good info that everyone should read (Whether considering to, or already taking the drug). What it comes down to is cost/benefit, or risk/reward. If a 75% chance(made up) chance of maintaining or regrowing your hair is worth a 1% chance of getting permanent or long lasting horrible side effects, then that's your choice. Everybody puts a different value on their hair and there's alot of variables that come in play when you make that choice. But the best thing you can do is do all possible research and make sure that that choice is an INFORMED one. Good luck.
- Reaction score
- 42
finfighter said:
I don't want it to seem like we're all coming down on you at the same time, but I have to add my voice to what the others have said about this issue!
Assuming that the side effects from finasteride are indeed caused by the reduction in DHT, there's no real reason to think that the side effects from a lower dose are going to be reduced by a greater margin than the desired effects from that same lower dose. In other words, the nearly "flat" dose-response of finasteride applies to both the side effects AND the desired effects. I would expect the side effects from a 1 mg dose to be only slightly less than a 5 mg dose, for the same reason that I expect the 1 mg dose to be only slightly less effective at protecting my hair than the 5 mg dose.
finfighter said:
Merck probably chose a 5 mg dose of finasteride for Proscar because it _is_ slightly more effective than 1 mg. BPH is a more serious medical condition than just losing hair, so they weren't going to pussyfoot around with a lower dose.
- Reaction score
- 42
finfighter said:
Oh, I certainly don't have any problem with doing that. In fact, I'd probably try the same thing, if it happened to me. But lowering the dose in an attempt to reduce or eliminate side effects is just a shot in the dark, a last-ditch effort to try something, anything at all, which _might_ help a little. You'd have to be awfully lucky for it to reduce side effects significantly, without simultaneously causing a disruption of the BENEFICIAL effects that you desire. I don't doubt that Dr. Rassam would agree with me on that.